Wyoming FEES

[pointingdogsrule]

This was taken from "bowsite".

(pointingdogsrule) I LOVE hunting Wyoming, however, is a deer tag in Wyoming worth $520 or an antelope worth $370????? It gets hard to justify with the additional costs for me: gas, some lodging.


Here is the new proposed license fees as they were presented at the Joint Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and Cultural Resource Committee meeting, held August 23, 2012 in Jackson Hole, Wyoming,
Non-resident:

Antelope: from $270 to $370

Deer: $310 to $520

Elk: $575 to $750

Moose: $1400 to $1750

Big Horn Sheep: remains the same $2500

Mountain Goat: $2150 to $2600

Black Bear: $360 to $437.50

Daily Fishing: remains $12

Annual Fishing: remains $90

Other Licenses:

Conservation Stamp: $12 to $14.50

Res. Archery: $14 to $17

Non-res. Archery: $28 to $34

Res. Application Fee: $5 to $6

Non-res. App. Fee: $14 to $17

The Special (pricey) fee for elk, deer, antelope will increase 21% as per this proposal.

Nothing mentioned about any Points fee increase....yet.

Nothing set in stone yet.....




From: Bill in MI Date: 06-Sep-12

 

[sbhooper]

Several years back, Colorado decided in all their wisdom that they would raise the price of cow elk tags to $400. I wrote them and said not only" no", but" hell no". I told them that I hoped they had good luck selling all those licenses to the Denver yuppies, because I was done with them.

I am obviously not the only one that did that. The next year the price was back to $250 and I went back to hunting elk in Colorado.

All these fees are about to put me out of the hunts. I cannot justify the amount of money necessary for most hunt trips now. My out-of-state hunts may be limited to Wyoming doe antelope in the future.

I have the preference points for a pretty good antelope hunt in Wyoming next year and that may be my last trophy type hunt.

 

[Ben Lamb]

So how do you propose funding the conservation agency in charge of managing wildlife if not licenses?

 

[pseshooter300]

Antelope tag going up a $100 that is crazy

 

[sreekers]

Its a frustrating process to see the license fees go up every year. Ben Lamb is correct though, how else will we fund it?

 

[Hooligan]

So how do you propose funding the conservation agency in charge of managing wildlife if not licenses?

Not sure of the other states, but if Oregon were able to respond to, and prosecute half the game violators and really put it to them in the way of penalties, the agencies would have PLENTY of $$ and wouldnt have to stick it to us guys trying to do it legal. Just my .02

 

[Papa-Zulu]

One solution to continue funding state agencies is to impose a modest increase on RESIDENT licenses, but resident sportsmen in the West have a propensity to howl long and loudly at such action. They will drive a $50,000 pickup and haul a pair of ATVs or snowmobiles worth many thousands, but an increase of twenty bucks in their resident license makes them apoplectic!

 

[Ben Lamb]

One solution to continue funding state agencies is to impose a modest increase on RESIDENT licenses, but resident sportsmen in the West have a propensity to howl long and loudly at such action. They will drive a $50,000 pickup and haul a pair of ATVs or snowmobiles worth many thousands, but an increase of twenty bucks in their resident license makes them apoplectic!

Amen Papa!

Last time I worked in WY was 2005. We pushed through a 20% increase in resident license fees and almost didn't get it because of the overwhelming racket produced by "conservationist" sportsmen who don't think they should pay for a license at all. We coupled that with some general fund monies for non-game species and capital construction. It worked.

Glad to see TRW taking this up. Without knowing what the financial picture for the agency looks like, it's tough to say whether or not these NR license fee increases are unreasonable. One thing is for sure, it would bring parity between WY and surrounding states. WY has generally been higher on the NR curve than other states, IIRC.

 

[BuzzH]

These are only proposals.

I think one big mistake Wyoming makes is they dont raise fees every year, rather once every 3-4 years.

I believe a more modest increase yearly, rather than an all-at-once fee increase would help ease both the budget and the whining about license fees.

Even though I understand that the fee increases will likely make some hunters think twice about going...the licenses are still about the cheapest part of most out-of-state hunts for elk, deer, and antelope.

For those that make hunting a priority, they will find ways to keep the costs manageable...be it less fancy equipment, more modest accommodations, sharing fuel expenses, etc. I know in the last 4-5 years I rarely make a day hunt anymore. I always plan on going for 2-3 days at a minimum to save fuel prices and wear and tear on my vehicles.

I also agree that Wyoming Residents should step up to the plate a lot more in the license fee department. I would have no problem if pronghorn were $75, deer $100, and elk $150 for residents. Sheep, Goat, and Moose for Residents should be $500 for residents as well.

The fact is that management costs money and the system adopted to manage it is a user based system. There is a lot of positives that come from that...the down side is, when management costs go up, hunters and fishermen are expected to step up and pay more. When that happens, its more than likely some will fold up shop and refuse to pay any more than they do now.

Tough deal...and I think hunters/anglers better start trying to get creative with finding outside funding if they dont like the license fee increases. One thing to bitch about a problem...another to find workable solutions.

 

[fowladdict]

One solution to continue funding state agencies is to impose a modest increase on RESIDENT licenses, but resident sportsmen in the West have a propensity to howl long and loudly at such action. They will drive a $50,000 pickup and haul a pair of ATVs or snowmobiles worth many thousands, but an increase of twenty bucks in their resident license makes them apoplectic!

I completely agree!! I hunt 2-3 states every year and the way I see it by paying an extra 20 bucks for my resident tags here in Idaho, it could save me hundreds in other states if all states would do the same thing.

However, I read somewhere (not 100% on this) that the states (Idaho specifically) can only increase resident fees a certain percentage every so often. It was quite a small percentage, that fees wouldn't increase much.

 

[sbhooper]

I don't have a problem with fees, but the rate at which some states raise the non-resident fees is rediculous. I pay exhorbitant fees so that I can hunt on taxpayer funded lands that residents pay nearly nothing for. There is no reason that resident fees should be bargain basement while departments depend on non-residents for their funding. The discrepancy has been discussed many times on different forums and I don't care to discuss it again.

The bottom line is that departments need the funds, but by the same token, if they price people out of the field, then they are going to lose both funding and support. This country is rapidly going the route of Europe to become a place where only rich folks can do the good hunts. I don't see it changing and everybody always gripes about not being able to recruit hunters. Gee, I wonder why?

Maybe some of the game departments need to look closer at how they spend their funds to start with and they may not need such high fees. Colorado's damage payment program needs some serious oversight and I have seen plenty of other travesties with any game departments that I have been envolved.

 

[nidahunter]

I am glad I am going this year, because if this increase goes through I will not be going in the future. Same reason I am hunting Wyoming this year and not Montana (where I gave up 3 points). Hopefully they will rethink such a large increase, I really dont want this to be my last antelope hunt!

 

[BuzzH]

sbhooper said, "I pay exhorbitant fees so that I can hunt on taxpayer funded lands that residents pay nearly nothing for."

As a Non-Resident you dont pay any more for taxpayer funded lands than anyone else...so why are you draggin that red herring into the discussion? Land ownership is of no concern when it comes to wildlife.

Its also fair to note that every state has the right to discriminate against NR hunters with license fees, bag limits, permit numbers, season length, etc.

Also, the number one reason listed for people giving up hunting is because they dont have anywhere to hunt, not because of the fees.

 

[spook12]

Ben, Buzz, I know that you guys are dialed in on the thinking that goes on inside the western states game departments so let me ask.

Why don't they consider securing funding from all residents of their state? It seems lazy at best that every time there is a shortfall in revenue the go to response is too jack prices on NR fees.

I know that some hunters are hesitant to bring non consumptive residents into the funding of wildlife management, for fear of having their voice in that management reduced but don't they have a pretty big seat at the table anyway?

Just think about it for the Resident hunter.

1. The state wildlife agencies have the funding they need to function.
2. Some tags could be removed from the NR pool and returned to the R pool because said agencies are not beholding to the NR dollars
3. You are securing funds from non consumptive R's who have a large voice already in how wildlife is being managed.

I know that R's get sick of only drawing some tags every couple of years, so it just seems logical to find ways to get funding from inside a state and to quit always looking outward for dollars. It seems that this model puts the management for a states wildlife on the shoulders of the people to whom they have been entrusted.

 

[skeet20]

Fees

How about a program like this since a lot of hunting is done on Federal land.

Everyone who hunts on federal land has to buy a federal lic. This would be good in all 50 states and the money goes down the same rat hole the rest of our tax money.

States would still mange the game and set seasons quotas ect and sell the tags. The states would get to keep all the money from the tag sales. No state lic required to hunt on federal land.

All tags for game on federal land would cost the same for everyone

States could set there own regs for hunting on state and private land and charge what they want as they do now.

I feel a system like this would be fair to all of use who own the federal land we hunt on and the states would get more revenue because they set the price of the tags and everyone pays the same. If they need more money and raise prices, the residents also get the increase. This would make the value of the game equal for everyone

I have bought a lot of non resident tags and lic over the past 40 years and have usually hunted on federal land. I have never understood why a person who lives in the state should pay less since we both have the same degree of ownership of the federal land located in that state .

I would be interested in hearing some of your thoughts on this idea.

 

[BuzzH]

spook12,

I tend to agree that the non-consumptive users should open their wallets. The problem is how do you go about that? How do you enforce a rule that requires them to pitch in with funding?

Also, you wont find me griping about the number of tags available to NR's in Wyoming. I think thats one of the main reasons so many NR's hunt Wyoming is because there is lots of tags available to them, lots of places to hunt (public land, Walk-in, HMA's), and plenty of wildlife. Even if outside funding sources could be found, I wouldnt be in favor of lowering the percentage of NR tags available.

 

[spook12]

Buzz, there are always ways to ''get'' people to open their wallets. I don't know how about a 1/8 or 1/4 cent sales tax.
When i mentioned moving NR tags to R pools i guess i was talking big picture, not just Wy. Just seems like its real easy for tags to be removed from Rs because they generally represent very little money whereas NR tags seem to be the life blood of most game departments.

 

[BuzzH]

skeet20,

Are you drunk? I hope so as that is about the dumbest thing I've read on a hunting board, which is pretty impressive to say the least.

I look at it this way in regard to places to hunt and associated "costs".

You pay $300-$350 for a state tag in Wyoming and have roughly 27 millions acres of FS/BLM lands to hunt free of charge. Throw in another few million of HMA/Walk-in and State lands....likely surpassing 30 million acres of land to hunt that YOU personally pay very little if anything to manage. At the very least you pay no more to use it than a resident of Wyoming.

Now, I buy a NR Ilinois license to hunt deer...how much free public ground can I hunt? How crowded is the very little public land that I can hunt? If my math is correct...836,000 acres? Not sure if you have walkin/HMA program. Say its another 800,000 acres. Looks to me like a license is 300-450 for a NR deer there in IL.

So, now I have a $350ish deer tag and around 800,000 total acres I could "potentially" hunt. My options are to hunt crowded public land or pay for access to hunt. If I pay for access that could cost who knows how much more.

All of a sudden I'm dropping 1k+ for access and a tag to chase a whitetail and I'll be very limited on where I can hunt.

Yet, at the same time you can hunt 30 million plus acres and never pay a cent more for that access all for $300-$350?

Who's state is really shafting hunters?

 

[MN Public Hunter]

All these states need to jack up the cost on the residents and quit punishing only the non - residents IMO. Residents pay about $25-$35 for what ever and like you said, drive around in $50,000 cars...etc.etc..

 

[gman82001]

I agree with a increase to help but tag fees are not the only funding the dept gets I understood they get funding from the normal everyday taxes paid by people who livein that particular state day in day out so that is why they sell residents tags cheaper because in theory they help all year as compared to just the 10 days a nr is in town.... Like I say that was just my understanding don't yell at me if I'm wrong just educate me