Wildife Task force 90-10, etc.

[goodhunt]

If I understand you correctly, if Wyoming would have just started allocating licenses 90/10 from the beginning that we would be all good?

No, although shifting baselines would have made it more palatable for most NR. I am just trying to provide an outside perspective and perhaps make some people think outside themselves. I've never hunted WY and I do not have a huge investment in points that I care about. I have donated money and a little time to help wildlife and fight public lands battles that mattered much more there than they do here. That perspective that is clearly not welcome here however. I will let WY deal with WY issues and no longer get involved in issues that affect that state.

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

that chart was close to 82 percent,,that was what information i gathered,,77percent plus 3 for half of the "combined" and you got 80 pct funded by non residents,,reasonably close.again its very clear,,,when the money dries up from non residents,who ya gonna call???Biden for a bail out?he just killed your pipeline jobs on day 1,,,what else pays good in wyoming??

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Sometimes when bear hunting, do you just run up and poke it?

I’m still pretty middle of the road on allocations for D/E/A; among other things I’m wary of the potential for ending up with certain outfitter handouts in “exchange” for a move on splits. I will be commenting to the task force generally, and personally to those on it who I know when I firm up some thoughts.

I’m in support of 90/10 for MSG, and all for more tags in the random pool, my kids will never draw via points.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

So clearly there is some consensus b/t WY resident hunters and outfitters within the task force on 90/10 for MSG and possibly expand that to LQ DEA. These are all things that the WY resident hunters want. What happens when the outfitters want something in return? What happens when outfitters want set aside tags within the non-resident allocation for deer, elk, antelope? Will WY resident hunters sell out DIY non-resident hunters and endorse outfitter set asides to get their 90/10 allocation? It will be interesting to see.

 

[Bowhuntrben]

Quite a heated topic. Looking at this forum has gotten me thinking more about it, and I understand both sides' point of view.

In the end, I think it would be fair for WY to say that they're going 100/0 for the "Big 5". Plenty of other states do this, and I couldn't blame them for wanting to keep this very limited resource for their own residents...most of which would still never get a chance to hunt them. Knowing nonresidents have invested into the points system, I think it shows WY still is considering them by even keeping 90-10. I don't think the financial argument is a good one when it comes to these species. There's just not enough licenses that the money can't be made up elsewhere. Also, there are residents that would still use outfitters if they were to draw one of these coveted tags..and residents that would go spend time putting money back into the community near where their tag is.

Another topic, but perhaps a way for states to make it more likely that more people can draw a tag for one of these coveted species would be to make it once-in-a-lifetime for any of the species...meaning that if you draw any one of them, that you could never draw another one of the Big 5 again. No doubt, this wouldn't be popular among many, but it could provide more opportunity to more people. You'd just have to choose which species is most important to you.

As for going 90-10 for EDA, I again think it's fair for residents to want this. There will still be plenty of opportunity for nonresidents. It will potentially provide even more opportunity for nonresidents in regards to elk. There will be more general tags available. Folks who are set on getting a top-tier unit will still wait out the preference point game (or drop out because they don't want to hunt the general tag), and more people who want to actually hunt WY regularly will be able to draw a tag more often. Everybody says how good the WY general elk tag is...so I'm not understanding why people are complaining now that this is a tag they will be more likely to get. The primary people that benefit from not making a change are the people who have been in the game for a long time. We should be considering the nonresidents just getting started as well, and I think this system may provide more opportunity for them in some cases.

I also think it seems unfair to residents with the current system that a nonresident can buy points for many years without actually hunting...then end up drawing a guaranteed top-tier tag. Meanwhile, residents don't use a preference point system and thus could not do the same thing and may never be able to even draw the same tag the nonresident is "guaranteed" of drawing with patience. I totally understand residents wanting to put more tags into their "pool" so that they have a better chance of drawing one of these coveted tags or wanting to see their kids having a chance at a great tag.

I wonder how many nonresidents who got into the game would've gotten in if it had started at 90-10? Personally, I would've still gotten in. I have a lot of points in the WY system, and while I don't "like" the thought of things changing, that doesn't make it wrong to make the change. In the end, life will go on.

I find the comments saying people will no longer contribute to the wildlife in WY because of this pathetic. If you were doing it for anything other than yourself before, why should this change your willingness to help the wildlife?

 

[rwc101]

I find the comments saying people will no longer contribute to the wildlife in WY because of this pathetic. If you were doing it for anything other than yourself before, why should this change your willingness to help the wildlife?

 

[EYJONAS!]

I knew it was @EYJONAS! all along.

Your gonna make me re read all this shit to see what I started.....

 

[wytex]

that chart was close to 82 percent,,that was what information i gathered,,77percent plus 3 for half of the "combined" and you got 80 pct funded by non residents,,reasonably close.again its very clear,,,when the money dries up from non residents,who ya gonna call???Biden for a bail out?he just killed your pipeline jobs on day 1,,,what else pays good in wyoming??

WE have no pipeline jobs in Wyoming and when the last i=one came through they brought in workers so ok, whatever.

 

[rwc101]

 

[Oak]

I’m still pretty middle of the road on allocations for D/E/A; among other things I’m wary of the potential for ending up with certain outfitter handouts in “exchange” for a move on splits. I will be commenting to the task force generally, and personally to those on it who I know when I firm up some thoughts.

WY residents don't need my input on how to allocate your available tags, but I'm surprised that by some comments in this thread it appears that landowner tags or outfitter set asides might be on the table. That is a deal with the devil that would be a non-starter with me. The state's current landowner tag program isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than some other states.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

WY residents don't need my input on how to allocate your available tags, but I'm surprised that by some comments in this thread it appears that landowner tags or outfitter set asides might be on the table. That is a deal with the devil that would be a non-starter with me. The state's current landowner tag program isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than some other states.

With the makeup of the TF it should be no surprise that landowner or outfitter tags are on the table. But that does not mean that there will not be a fight. IMO these are a much bigger issue/concern than the 90/10 on DEA. Not to speak for others that attended the first meeting but I think all the public that attended is going to pushback as hard as possible on any method to monetize tag distribution.

 

[RobertD]

Honestly, just to echo some others' sentiments, the idea of the outfitter crowd using DEA 90/10 as a bargaining chip is the only thing that truly scares me about the whole situation. If that happens it should piss off both Rs and NRs.

 

[WapitiBob]

that chart was close to 82 percent,,that was what information i gathered,,77percent plus 3 for half of the "combined" and you got 80 pct funded by non residents,,reasonably close.again its very clear,,,when the money dries up from non residents,who ya gonna call???Biden for a bail out?he just killed your pipeline jobs on day 1,,,what else pays good in wyoming??

That chart is license revenue.
As of Sept '20, 77% of the 58.3m in license revenue was from nr. That 44.89m in nr license revenue is just over half of the 88.56m total dept revenue.

 

[JDH]

Wyoming has never held a gun to anybody's head and made them buy points or hunt here.

After I use my points I probably won't be buying points or hunting there.

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

with wyoming being 48 percent federal land,,,"blm and nat forest lands"at least what google says as fact,,this is clearly gonna be a resident vs non res ident thing,,residents of all the other states shouldnt get the rug pulled out from them when almost 1/2 is federal land anyway..if they do go 90-10,,i see alot of non residents spending there money elsewhere,,or at least shopping for what is there "best bang for the buck" as i always try to figure out.Again changing rules midstream is not fair for all the people building points,,whether its just for the big 5 or deer ,elk,and antelope...90-10 is not a win-win as far as im concerned,,,i believe there are more non-resident applicants than the entire population of wyoming,,though i dont have those numbers,,it is a ton of money$$$$$$$

 

[D_Walt]

with wyoming being 48 percent federal land,,,"blm and nat forest lands"at least what google says as fact,,this is clearly gonna be a resident vs non res ident thing,,residents of all the other states shouldnt get the rug pulled out from them when almost 1/2 is federal land anyway..if they do go 90-10,,i see alot of non residents spending there money elsewhere,,or at least shopping for what is there "best bang for the buck" as i always try to figure out.Again changing rules midstream is not fair for all the people building points,,whether its just for the big 5 or deer ,elk,and antelope...90-10 is not a win-win as far as im concerned,,,i believe there are more non-resident applicants than the entire population of wyoming,,though i dont have those numbers,,it is a ton of money$$$$$$$

The only “elsewhere” with a higher % of NR tags is Colorado, and that shoe will drop in the coming years. I Honestly believe virtually every western state could cut NR tags in half, double (or triple) the NR tag price and still sell every tag every year. I think the “revenue loss” argument is a non-issue.
Fact is, especially on the “big 5”, WY resident opportunities/tags have dropped drastically while their population has grown substantially. 25 years ago there were 4 times the Moose tags available compared to this year - a large and growing Moose population is no longer the case, similar situation with sheep. Something has to give and I realize it’s frustrating for us non-residents but I don’t get the angst and level to which some take it as a personal attack.
The days of making 3,4 or 5 out of state hunts/year are rapidly coming to an end due to supply and demand market forces - that’s the reality and it’s not likely to change. The cheese is moving, NR hunters best start making a plan for the future…or take up golf.

 

[dan.kirkpatrick]

with wyoming only having a total population of 550000 folks last info i got,,,where is the "cheese" gonna come from? that is a micro population of residents,,and no there resident opertunitys havnt gone away,,,same playing field as its always been?? again its gonna be a residents for,,non residents against issue,,plain and simple..its hard to believe the outfitters would want to cut off such a large income potential from out of state???lets face it,,where are any good high pay union jobs in wyoming? you cant afford even the tags if your only work is at 1 of only 12 walmarts in wyoming at min wage.i just dont see how residents can make up the difference in budget moneys,,,good luck wyoming..residents can still get otc tags like they always have been able to for the standard big game in the area.

 

[rwc101]

,where are any good high pay union jobs in wyoming? you cant afford even the tags if your only work is at 1 of only 12 walmarts in wyoming at min wage.i just dont see how residents can make up the difference in budget moneys,,,good luck wyoming..residents can still get otc tags like they always have been able to for the standard big game in the area.

Stop pretending you care about WYGF funding, jobs in Wyoming, or resident opportunity here.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

The only “elsewhere” with a higher % of NR tags is Colorado, and that shoe will drop in the coming years. I Honestly believe virtually every western state could cut NR tags in half, double (or triple) the NR tag price and still sell every tag every year. I think the “revenue loss” argument is a non-issue.
Fact is, especially on the “big 5”, WY resident opportunities/tags have dropped drastically while their population has grown substantially. 25 years ago there were 4 times the Moose tags available compared to this year - a large and growing Moose population is no longer the case, similar situation with sheep. Something has to give and I realize it’s frustrating for us non-residents but I don’t get the angst and level to which some take it as a personal attack.
The days of making 3,4 or 5 out of state hunts/year are rapidly coming to an end due to supply and demand market forces - that’s the reality and it’s not likely to change. The cheese is moving, NR hunters best start making a plan for the future…or take up golf.

I think you make a valid point and I agree that states like WY will sell out tags if they double, triple, or even 10x tag prices in this market. However, I don’t believe WY population has increased substantially of recent, it has decreased at times and has def not increased substantially when compared with other mountain states.

Analysis: Four Wyoming takeaways from new census numbers - WyoFile

Wyoming’s population growth was anemic compared to the rest of the nation and other Mountain West states. WyoFile examines what that means for the state.

www.wyofile.com

Fact is WY residents want more tags and they want more better tags, population increase isn’t a major factor. I don’t think the “3,4, or 5 out of state hunts a year” person is the one most opposed to tag allocation changes, it is the hunter who takes 1 out of state hunt a year and is heavily invested in the pref point system patiently waiting for that once in 5/10/15 years hunt in WY.

 

[thebestusernamesaretaken]

As much as it pains me to say this about the OP, it seems to me that (as Buzz stated), Wyoming would likely be able to recover the Non-resident lost revenue from Grizzly, Sheep, Goat, Moose and Bison through other revenue generating schemes.

However, any tampering with the current system may still have a negative impact on non-resident demand. I figure with about 400 employees; the Wyoming Game and fish should have just over $20MM in employment expenses. That’s over double what the resident tag revenue produces. While they (WG&F), seem to be well within a margin for error; it seems that they could technically reduce revenue while still maintaining the current employment structure, (assuming that they are well under 35% employment expense to revenue).

The impact of any potential reduced revenues would have to be reducing the amount of conservation projects that WG&F have control over. I figure that they have about $5MM dollars going to Grizzly and Wolf conservation which is likely impossible to change. BTY, don’t get sidetracked on Grizzly and Wolf – that’s a subject for another thread in a universe far, far, away.

While the 90% resident, 10% non-resident tag allocation seems to be standard among most Western States; please understand that it does not sit well with those who have paid for 77% of the tag revenue (and no reasonable person would expect that to be so). Still, allthough it is a terrible disparity, many will tolerate it to get in at least one or two hunts.

I think that if residents recognize this fact (that non-residents have significant value to WY), and that non-residents recognize that residents should have first crack at the tag allocation, then both parties could come to agreement in good faith. As I see it the outstanding issues are (inorder of importance to me ):

• Residents want more opportunities for the best tags and consider the non-resident allocations are the reason for not being able to hunt those areas.
• Large Landowners want tag allocations as compensation for wildlife damages, wildlife conservation and taxes incurred.
• Non-residents do not currently have a seat at the table that they paid for; they want opportunities to hunt and honestly to want to hunt for trophy’s commiserate with the cost of the tag.
• Outfitter businesses seem to want tag allocations (or at least guided non-resident requirements) and exclusive access to public / private land where the highest number of best trophy potential animals are.

I figure that Wyoming Game and Fish is well aware of the issues with revenue disparity and will likely make decisions to balance the desires of the resident hunters, landowners, local business, their budgetary concerns and other stakeholders such as non-resident purchasers of licenses (the market).

This seems a bit dated, but I would expect it would be updated once a year. This was posed on Game and Fish:

Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Revenue

Updated Sept. 2020

License Revenue This includes hunting and fishing licenses sales, conservation stamps and fees, preference point sales, boat registration fees and the Super Tag program.

$56,363,841

Federal Aid (PR/DJ) Federal aid includes Pittman-Robertson (PR) and Dingell Johnson (DJ) funds from federal excise tax on sporting arms, ammunition and fishing and boating equipment. Funds are apportioned to state wildlife agencies for conservation work, hunter education programs, operation of archery and shooting ranges, and sport fisheries work. The Commission must match funds derived from PR/DJ at a rate of 25% state and 75% federal.

$19,400,000 This amount may be reduced with potentialy reduced revenues, as it's based on WG&F's ability to pay 25% of any given project

Grants Grant funds awarded to the Department from conservation and other partners to achieve specific outcomes that benefit the Department’s mission.

$6,400,000

Interest generated from Commission accounts.

$2,700,000 This fregin number is the WG&F holding your application tag money

Other Revenue generated from Commission owned property, magazine publication sales, Access Yes donations and other miscellaneous items.

$3,700,000

Total

$88,563,841

The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission’s (Commission) revenue is generated from fish and wildlife constituents, associated federal funding sources, grants, donations, and from Commission owned property. The Commission receives no State General Funds. Revenue can be broken into five main categories and is reflective only of revenue that can be expended.

The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission’s yearly revenue is approximately $88.5 million. This includes hunting and fishing licenses, conservation stamps and fees, preference points, boat registration, Super Tag and Federal Aid. The majority of the revenue, $75.7 million or 85%, comes from hunters, anglers, recreational shooters, and boaters.

Of the $56.3 million that comes from license revenue, approximately 77% comes from nonresidents.

Prior to the current fiscal year, the Commission received approximately $800,000 annually from the State General Fund for license recoupment to offset the revenue lost from free and reduced-price licenses. This year General Fund support was eliminated to aid in the State’s current financial crisis.

The Commission’s budget is based on needs and identified priorities. When revenue exceeds the budget, the Commission places those funds in a reserve similar to a personal savings account. This reserve is for emergencies and allocating funding to significant projects, including capitol construction, wildlife crossings and wildlife research.

All funds tied to license revenue must be controlled by the Commission and spent on approved wildlife related activities to meet the requirements of Federal Aid.

Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Revenue

Updated Sept 2020