I don’t get your complaint. If you are ok hunting 26, you should have put it as a 3rd choice and you’d be going hunting there this fall. The fact that you aren’t is nobody’s fault but your own.
Unsuccessful Wyoming Resident. Options?
- Thread starter Dougt3507
- Start date
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
My third choice was a shoe in last year...much like 26. It just jumped 300% in first choice applicants this year. Thank you for your Minnesota wisdom, but I think instead I'll push for limiting NR opportunity...particularly in light of comments like this.
Sorry to offend you. You are free to do as you please. I was simply pointing out that your statement that you had no chance to hunt antelope in Wyoming was false. You had plenty of opportunity. Unfortunately, you also had some bad luck. That said, there are a bunch of areas, 26 included, where your odds undoubtedly would have been 100% this year, but you didn’t put them as a 3rd choice.
cahunter805
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,464
Just curious. Given your example why wasn’t 26 one of your choices?
cahunter805
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,464
That’s a huge jump. Was there big tag cuts to your 3rd choice unit?
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
1) It's far from home.
2) My 3rd choice, a low public land area closer to home that I own property in, was a shoe-in (apparently not).
3) Hunting the inlaws ranch isn't always what folks would have you think
BUT
I would definitely rather hunt 26 than have no tag...we live antelope and its usually makes up a decent chunk of our annual wild game meals.
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
Nope. Huge jump in 1st choice applicants. I'm still trying to understand why: Thread 'What am I missing? Wyoming Antelope 38-2' https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/what-am-i-missing-wyoming-antelope-38-2.313717/
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
In general, the specifics of my situation aren't relevant here. To the OP's point, it's getting much harder for residents (2010 - 6700 EXCESS resident buck tags, 2022 - 15,500 DEFICIT of resident buck tags). My additional point was that when the NR tag rollover was implemented, it wasn't really a big deal when every resident could get a tag with 1000s left over. When 40% of the residents won't draw a buck tag, like the situation today, then it's time to reconsider the rollover.
RobertD
Well-known member
I agree with you but man it really underscores the population decline when you go back to that 08-11 range
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
For sure!
LopeHunter
Well-known member
50% of the time, it works 100% of the time!
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Wyo has some sensitive Cowboys.
You should consider the fact that many WY residents are working age with families, little or no vacation time, and not much for expendable income. A lot of folks here DEPEND on wild game for their protein and have been able to make it work until the past few years.
WY is big. It is over a seven hour drive to where I will be hunting this season (general) as we did not draw elk or deer units of choice this season either. Fortunately I am retired. Didn't draw antelope last year.
Everybody wants to hunt WY, and I did too when we were non-res. To put it in perspective, if folks from 49 other states and several countries came to Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, etc by the tens of thousands and took 882 of 1100 tags in a unit it would no doubt be viewed differently to the residents of those states!
Bullshot
Well-known member
In the case of these 882 tags, nobody “took” anything. The tag rollover is 100% not the fault of any NR, I doubt any NR ever pushed for that, and most don’t even know it happens. It would seem to be an easy fix for residents to make happen, surely its not legislation, right? Just game department draw policies that probably worked much better a few years back when there were plentiful tags and probably any resident could just pick up a leftover, worst case. I just don’t think the rollover issue is one that should be high on the list of complaints about NR as it seems self inflicted, and I’m not trying to be a smart a**.
I completely understand this, but it has nothing to do with the rollover of leftover resident tags. My point was simply that if any resident wanted to hunt antelope bad enough this year, the opportunity was theirs. They get first shot at the tags. All they have to do is choose their 3rd choice wisely. Now, if they live in the central or western part of the state and couldn’t draw an area close to home, that is because there were too many residents applying for too few tags. Those areas didn’t have leftovers resident tags to begin with. Totally different issue.
Hell no on general antelope tags, put in hope you draw if not plan other hunts with your dad, lots of opportunities here in Wyoming. Antelope just seem so abundant cause where they live. Out in the open along highways ect. As you can see lot of cuts to quotas so I don’t think the heards are doing that great right now, hopefully they get what the need from Mother Nature to start building back up, Ohhh no one in my family drew buck tags either on to other plans now!!
Well, add your =comments to mine about just that to the Task Force. I've been emailing about the rollover since the get go. Nesvik tried to tell me it would affect WG&F management if those licenses didn't get sold, WTH ! Just let residents have 1st shot at the leftovers , not roll them over, then sell all of them to whomever.
RobertD
Well-known member
Believe it or not I left comments with them a while back asking for the same thing instead of 90/10 when I thought antelope might go 90/10. They didn't respond.
But yeah, he's probably right IF they didn't get sold but we all know that the tags are not going to just not get sold.
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
I completely agree. I too commented to the TF in my initial comments when it first got started. But I'll do it again.
DrH
Member
Just a question, from a guy who formerly was in charge of the guys managing big game in WY: Why do I get the feeling every time I read this same bitching, which I've heard for all of my 53 years in this state, that none of you give a damn about the animals you're hunting? Is it the Me Generation?
Over nearly thirty years, we went from the earth being covered with antelope in the 1970s and 1980s, followed by declines since then, to the situation today, with populations much lower in all areas. We are now living with the effects of too many antelope for too many years. Those large numbers of antelope you all loved beat the hell out of the habitat, like the mule deer in western Wyoming from the 1950s through the 1980s, and now, with the drought, even the crappy habitat is in poorer shape. There aren't as many twins, a sure sign of habitat problems, widespread sagebrush control has removed important winter range throughout Wyoming, to be replaced by cheatgrass, and due to drought, there not only isn't much water, the shrubs that help provide protein to keep a doe alive don't have enough protein, and broad-leaved plants(forbs) needed to help a doe produce enough quality milk to keep fawns alive are nearly non-existent . Wet meadows became dry in places like Shirley Basin in the 1990s, and springs in many draws quit running. Same results in much of Wyoming. Yet I keep hearing "nothing has changed". BS!
Part of the problem with controlling antelope was residents who wanted to kill the last trophy buck, but wouldn't shoot a doe. Because they didn't have to, due to the high number of antelope and numbers of antelope on public land, residents wouldn't go to private land and wouldn't pay trespass fees. I agree it took nerve for landowners to bitch about numbers of antelope, then demand a trespass fee. So, to encourage doe harvest required to control numbers of antelope(because bucks don't have fawns), prices of doe licenses were reduced, and people could have multiple licenses, five in many areas, and all they wanted in parts of NE Wyoming where most residents wouldn't go. The rollover started then to get licenses issued, not have to send return checks, and make people reapply when licenses were available. Remember, it wasn't the computer age yet. Nonresidents managed antelope, not residents, those people with five doe/fawn licenses for the price of a buck license from states all over the country who recognized there's 6 pounds difference in the hog-dressed weight of buck and doe antelope, loved a bargain, and weren't afraid their manhood was in jeopardy from killing females. Mark my words, had that not happened, antelope would be in much worse shape than they are today.
At the same time, we didn't want to ruin the quality of hunting for bucks, nor make the hunting in those days a worse madhouse than it was. A guy hunting bucks should be able to go out the last couple of days of the season and still find a quality buck, given that not all areas have the same quality genetics. Warden Roger Bredehoft, then in Jeffrey City, suggested maintaining a post-season buck:doe ratio of 40 bucks per hundred does, and managing herds by increasing doe/fawn licenses. That eventually was adopted statewide, and far as I know it is still in place in most areas today. Don't know about you, but I don't want to have to kill a yearling buck in a quality hunting area because managers issued too many licenses. When herds are reduced, the number of licenses to hunt bucks declines, and the drawing odds get worse for type 1 licenses, to maintain some quality. Ditto the number of doe/fawn licenses. I do not agree with the current G and F decision to reduce licenses in areas where habitat is poor and thus leave more animals out there in winter, stressing more of them, but it plays better with the current political climate. Ranchers do not add to their herds when the range is in poor shape, they sell animals. Healthy females produce more young, and the less competition for food, the healthier the doe, even on poorer habitat.
As for general licenses, antelope are open country creatures, and easy to eliminate, thus the limited number of licenses. When settlers came west, elk were eliminated from open country, as were white-tails and mule deer near settlements, shot for winter meat. Elk are now moving to places they once lived due to sanctuaries on private lands.
And before anyone asks, I have drawn three licenses to hunt buck antelope in 10 years and twelve doe/fawn licenses.
Over nearly thirty years, we went from the earth being covered with antelope in the 1970s and 1980s, followed by declines since then, to the situation today, with populations much lower in all areas. We are now living with the effects of too many antelope for too many years. Those large numbers of antelope you all loved beat the hell out of the habitat, like the mule deer in western Wyoming from the 1950s through the 1980s, and now, with the drought, even the crappy habitat is in poorer shape. There aren't as many twins, a sure sign of habitat problems, widespread sagebrush control has removed important winter range throughout Wyoming, to be replaced by cheatgrass, and due to drought, there not only isn't much water, the shrubs that help provide protein to keep a doe alive don't have enough protein, and broad-leaved plants(forbs) needed to help a doe produce enough quality milk to keep fawns alive are nearly non-existent . Wet meadows became dry in places like Shirley Basin in the 1990s, and springs in many draws quit running. Same results in much of Wyoming. Yet I keep hearing "nothing has changed". BS!
Part of the problem with controlling antelope was residents who wanted to kill the last trophy buck, but wouldn't shoot a doe. Because they didn't have to, due to the high number of antelope and numbers of antelope on public land, residents wouldn't go to private land and wouldn't pay trespass fees. I agree it took nerve for landowners to bitch about numbers of antelope, then demand a trespass fee. So, to encourage doe harvest required to control numbers of antelope(because bucks don't have fawns), prices of doe licenses were reduced, and people could have multiple licenses, five in many areas, and all they wanted in parts of NE Wyoming where most residents wouldn't go. The rollover started then to get licenses issued, not have to send return checks, and make people reapply when licenses were available. Remember, it wasn't the computer age yet. Nonresidents managed antelope, not residents, those people with five doe/fawn licenses for the price of a buck license from states all over the country who recognized there's 6 pounds difference in the hog-dressed weight of buck and doe antelope, loved a bargain, and weren't afraid their manhood was in jeopardy from killing females. Mark my words, had that not happened, antelope would be in much worse shape than they are today.
At the same time, we didn't want to ruin the quality of hunting for bucks, nor make the hunting in those days a worse madhouse than it was. A guy hunting bucks should be able to go out the last couple of days of the season and still find a quality buck, given that not all areas have the same quality genetics. Warden Roger Bredehoft, then in Jeffrey City, suggested maintaining a post-season buck:doe ratio of 40 bucks per hundred does, and managing herds by increasing doe/fawn licenses. That eventually was adopted statewide, and far as I know it is still in place in most areas today. Don't know about you, but I don't want to have to kill a yearling buck in a quality hunting area because managers issued too many licenses. When herds are reduced, the number of licenses to hunt bucks declines, and the drawing odds get worse for type 1 licenses, to maintain some quality. Ditto the number of doe/fawn licenses. I do not agree with the current G and F decision to reduce licenses in areas where habitat is poor and thus leave more animals out there in winter, stressing more of them, but it plays better with the current political climate. Ranchers do not add to their herds when the range is in poor shape, they sell animals. Healthy females produce more young, and the less competition for food, the healthier the doe, even on poorer habitat.
As for general licenses, antelope are open country creatures, and easy to eliminate, thus the limited number of licenses. When settlers came west, elk were eliminated from open country, as were white-tails and mule deer near settlements, shot for winter meat. Elk are now moving to places they once lived due to sanctuaries on private lands.
And before anyone asks, I have drawn three licenses to hunt buck antelope in 10 years and twelve doe/fawn licenses.
Similar threads
