WY preference point increase
- Thread starter Addicting
- Start date
Matthew57
Well-known member
I see. I just wondered if Treeshark was interested in getting rid of that trustee relationship in favor of the BCM. And why or why not. Apparently, it just comes down to votes.
If you are going to compare "today prices" as being relatively normal for the increase, why haven't R prices kept up?
The transition towards BCM
has already occurred years ago. Western states unfortunately did not solicit my opinion on the matter
Matthew57
Well-known member
I think the system has been fairly consistent over the years. I could be wrong.The transition towards BCM
Western states unfortunately did not solicit my opinion on the matter
It has not. Cost and opportunity have not remained in parity.
You guys just don't realize they need to raise PP fees to offset minor overall reduction in NR LE tags when quota on LE DEA go to 90/10 like they should be. They upped generals (boosted income) in that new "regional" that isnt regional tag to keep NRs paying and hooked loving to hunt in Wyoming. Its the crack salesman giving samples, your hooked now. So crackwhores this makes sense to get done first... lmao
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,685
Because some residents dont want to pay more, and itd be politically inconvient to do so. Which is unfortunate.
Id be interested if a legislator tied raising prices to cutting NR hunter numbers. They would garner more support if there was a return on the investment im sure.
But if youre using inflation to say the increase in price is in line with everything else then you can also say R cost increases are just normal inflation and "the same" in past year dollars. Not raising prices would then in effect actually be lowering them.
The only thing more appealing to resident voters would be cutting NR hunter hunters WITHOUT raising R prices.
Which is what almost always happens.
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 5,406
What would be interesting to see is a state tie it’s r/nr prices to a percentage like 95/5 apparently for montana so if the elk tag cost a nr 950 dollars we pay 50 for our resident tag
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,685
Not disagreeing that R tag costs should go up.... Its just a political problem. Not many get solved at state or national levels anymore and havent for a long time. Hardly unique.
Many R have seen their housing/rent costs double as compared to other states over the same time frame. Cheap access to outdoor activities is one small thing low income people have retained here.
I.e.
Also - price increases for R are in line with your states.
Last edited:
Matthew57
Well-known member
Come on guys, my state had no issue raising resident fees 38% this year. Time to keep up
Now do pref point fees, years to get a tag, NR tag fees, cost to apply etc…
I could see Montana raising General NR tag fees to the point at which they became essentially OTC. It would make the state more money (for conservation) and make things far more convenient vs their ridiculous preference point system. Furthermore, this would allow Montana to reduce or eliminate a bunch of the add-on NR tags (come home to hunt, etc) and still remain cost-positive while ensuring a better experience for resident hunters. If they play their business cards right, Block Management funding would even increase.
I should charge for this type of insight…
Last edited:
SAJ-99
Well-known member
It’s cheap because they aren’t required to pay their share. And the same people will complain vociferously about FWP. No way out of the whirlpool circling the drain.
But there are a few ways to kick the can down the road several years, some of which have been discussed on this thread.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
We all have perfected the art of can kicking.
Montana should shitcan every bonus and preference point system we have in place. mtmuleyNow do pref point fees, years to get a tag, NR tag fees, cost to apply etc…
I could see Montana raising General NR tag fees to the point at which they became essentially OTC. It would make the state more money (for conservation) and make things far more convenient vs their ridiculous preference point system. Furthermore, this would allow Montana to reduce or eliminate a bunch of the add-on NR tags (come home to hunt, etc) and still remain cost-positive while ensuring a better experience for resident hunters. If they play their business cards right, Block Management funding would even increase.
I should charge for this type of insight…
Your state/not mine, but I agree.
The state could easily recoup the financial hit by increasing NR application and tag fees so that residents aren’t impacted.
Then we can move on to the supposed 17,000 NR tag quota crap. mtmuley
Similar threads
