WY. Proposed Changes to NR Fees & Quotas

[Mram10us]

Yes I went and looked it up, the Federal government through grants and funds, paid ~$46million into the ID F&G according to the annual report, more than the total of what it was able to generate on their own.

For roads, ID gets back $1.06 for every $1 they put in from the govt, one of the few states that's a negative. But I guess facts cannot sway you?

On top of which, annual R licenses has fallen over the last decade, year after year. The very people in your own state don't want to hunt there. How else will F&G make up for the revenue loss? We all know Govt can't seem to stop spending money.

Fishing however has skyrocketed, so we are all these pesky NR you speak of? The total # of tags granted to NR has not increased, in fact R usually buy a good portion of the left over OTC tags except the last two years. Senior tags are down as well. It seems there are less R floating around, because less are buying tags? This includes both controlled and OTC. Even OIL availability has decreased across the state, because the animals are not being managed properly. I guess that's NR fault as well?

The point being NR are not blame for the decrease in ID hunting, your own F&G is who is having a problem managing the wildlife. Increasing tag prices won't curb anything, putting in controlled acreas however will.

Show me where any fed money goes to the trails up in the mountains where we hunt. You have zero idea how many roads are not county maintained and are taken care of by ranchers with their own equipment. Ask me how I know...

As for less hunting, deer and elk are up from ten years ago, so not sure where you are getting your numbers. I'm going off of the 2018 idfg numbers.

 

[Mram10us]

OP, sorry to hijack your thread. I'm not a fan of people putting words in my mouth and taking my stance out of context. I'm for residents of states getting first dibs on tags, even second tags and not having a certain percentage going to NR. Far from the anti-NR stance he was trying to portrait. Either way, hunters in their states don't owe me a thing, and I don't owe them anything. At the end of the day, we are all on the same 2A side and need to stand together, so I'll stop here. Great topic and thanks for posting.

 

[sp6x6]

I dont want get in big debate,Mt is trying to do the same thing.I think he is trying to show the stuff you dont see.I live by Glacier park,over a million visits.This has changes my whole area over time,where we all live.Such a large number of tourism,for MT the numbers are astonishing.Hunting does the same thing,the NR spend alot of money overall,how it trickles down.You say the numbers are up in ID, might be like MT where im at.I cant even find elk or deer local,where I shot many trophies,because of wolf .But east side has to many cow elk? I hunted the panhandle for about 6 years and left when wolfs got bad, I still hunt right over the top from there and it hasnt sprung back.Super hard step country ruined by the wolf.Towns like Trout cr survive on the backs of hunters and revenue brought in.I dont have a answer,get rid of wolf so some opportunity is back would be a start. Look what happend to Gardnier.

 

[SummitsCalling]

Not against NR hunting, but the residents should get the first opportunity at everything. I've met some great guys on the site here and especially run across "idiots" up in the mountains hunting were only goats and my group was Our resource is very finite and with hunting numbers doubling, that is a lot less to harvest.

Kip, you think you know a lot more than you really do. Think thru the numbers and see where it helps the res hunters, not just brings some money to the state. If I added up the taxes paid by me and the other res guys, it would dwarf anything you think you add to the pot. In 2018, res bought almost 70k deer tags compared to 11k NR tags.

I agreed with R first, but we as sportsman should manage for good opportunity for the next generation, even though hunter recruitment in your own state is going down year after year. If it's not a count road why would the govt pay to maintain it? Sounds like a road the rancher owns/maintains themselves but I guess it depends on the exact situaiton. I only driven fed/county/BLM managed roads, would be illegal to do otherwise

Per your numbers of tags, 70,000 x $24.75 (assuming not priced locked, 2019 fees) = $1.732mil

Non Resident Deer tags 11000 x 301.75 = $3.319mil

*Not including licenses, extra fees, etc.

Appears to me despite being 1/7th in numbers is worth 2x more just in tag fees. However that's just in animal fees.

I'm sure your property taxes, sales tax, etc add up to be quite a bit. My #s were to show you what tourism brings to the state. It's alot, and cutting back tags (which is already gonna happen I believe), will only hurt IDs economy. In fact your own F&G stated they will be raising fees due to the majority of the funding being provided by NR that they can't go without. I would argue most NR prob spend $2-5k without even going the outfitter route before tags/fees. I am not not discounting what R bring to the table, not only financially but otherwise.

I wanted to point out it's just not R who have something to lose despite $. I've hunted ID for almost two decades, not as long as some but hopefully it gives you reference of where I'm coming from. I also asked to be stationed there, and got to spend 4 years hunting the woods as a R. And I've continued to hunt as a NR. I've hunted areas just plauged by wolves, where most people wouldn't even bother because it had at least the chance to go. ID is not in a good spot in my opinion from a management point of view. NRs are not to blame, there's just less animals in my humble opinion.

Show me where any fed money goes to the trails up in the mountains where we hunt. You have zero idea how many roads are not county maintained and are taken care of by ranchers with their own equipment. Ask me how I know...

As for less hunting, deer and elk are up from ten years ago, so not sure where you are getting your numbers. I'm going off of the 2018 idfg numbers.

Trails are sometimes mainted by park services, blm or volunteers. Where I live the govt gives grants to the local recreation management area to pay for the trails, volunteers do most of the work but at least there's funding going into it. As someone who's maintaned countless miles upon miles and even more miles of trails, I'm fully aware of what it takes and the gratitude I have for people who help out. It's why I do my part to give back, on top of volunteering for search and rescue.

The numbers I was referencing were from the 2019 IDFG report, and subsequent years.

 

[L.Sherm]

That's my point 6x6 you never hear of the numbers thrown around about the revenue that hunting brought in around Gardner, I remember my brother going there right after the fire and telling me there were so many people you had to take your own rock to hide behind.

 

[Elk Hunter 338]

OP, sorry to hijack your thread. I'm not a fan of people putting words in my mouth and taking my stance out of context. I'm for residents of states getting first dibs on tags, even second tags and not having a certain percentage going to NR. Far from the anti-NR stance he was trying to portrait. Either way, hunters in their states don't owe me a thing, and I don't owe them anything. At the end of the day, we are all on the same 2A side and need to stand together, so I'll stop here. Great topic and thanks for posting.

I was born here in IDAHO 42 years ago on Lincolns birthday and im with you ...but you can't reason or even argue with guys that get silly numbers off the internet,, because politicians never lie!!!! they know best for our state and us dumb rednecks don't know what we talkin bout!

 

[sp6x6]

Sherm,My father inlaw wrote a article for a outdoor mag,like Feild n stream.Dont recall exactly,but back when Decker flats was refered to as the "firing line" I guess it was crazy,elk and people shooting chaos.He said you didnt even need to a rifle,just run out and tag a elk.Back when they had 24,000 or something like that. I was there in my earlier years to see many elk,trophys in town and the buffalo hunts also

 

[Deleted member 107796]

I brought up this subject about CO increases last year, when I found that there was a new $50 fee to just enter the sheep/goat/moose drawing! This was the only increase that I felt was a complete abuse of power and from the bill, was a way to make up for projects like reservoir repair, etc. that they had put off. Some responses to my post said that "pay to play" was completely fine for them and somebody actually wrote that those that pay "deserve the tag more" than those like myself, retired and trying to live sustainably and already saddled with the numerous licenses/fees we have to pay for.
Our comments may be worthwhile, but a call or letter to your state officials, both govt and USFS, has more impact.

 

[L.Sherm]

I guess the way I look at this Resident, non- resident thing is dont come into my house and tell me what's best for me or my state.

 

[BKM]

Unless you live here and see what it has become and where it is going, you don't understand. Why is it selfish to take care of those that pay for and care for the animals first. I don't travel elsewhere to hunt. If I did, I would be ready to pay a large price because that is fair. It is selfish, in my view, to expect the same opportunities without investing the same amount as others.
Not mad, as I know it is hard to tell view texts and posts.

Mram10us , u are correct.
I don't live there and have not been there in many yrs. When I hunted there in the 80's the game was abundant. The people were some of the nicest I've ever met. Many of the locals actually helped me find good areas to hunt.

Maybe my choice of adjectives wasn't very good. I don't know that u are selfish. Heck I don't know u at all. I apologize for that comment. I do know that we both are hunters and shooters and I like people that hunt and shoot.

The point that I was trying to make is that as sportsmen we all foot the bill. The game doesn't belong to just me or u. It belongs to us all.

I almost hunt nothing now but big whitetails. They are my passion. My home state (TN) sucks as far as managing for big deer. I have to go out of state and believe me it's not cheap.

As a nonresident I feel I get the shaft. I guess it just depends on which side of the fence we're on how we look at things. As for me I'll pay the high price for the privilege to hunt better places.

Once again, I meant no ill will.

 

[Kimber7man]

I have visited the great state of WY as a non-resident hunter 5 times in the past 6 years.
Have hunted with an outfitter every time.
I am not one to tell residents in another state how to run their state.
If they raised the tag cost another $50 to $100 it would not stop me from coming out to hunt there.
Have even paid the extra for the "special" tag just so I could feel special.

Considering the economics, WY has less than 600,000 residents. Not all of them hunt. State could see a lot less revenue by reducing the number of NR licenses. It's up to them to decide...

 

[Hatrick]

I brought up this subject about CO increases last year, when I found that there was a new $50 fee to just enter the sheep/goat/moose drawing! This was the only increase that I felt was a complete abuse of power and from the bill, was a way to make up for projects like reservoir repair, etc. that they had put off. Some responses to my post said that "pay to play" was completely fine for them and somebody actually wrote that those that pay "deserve the tag more" than those like myself, retired and trying to live sustainably and already saddled with the numerous licenses/fees we have to pay for.
Our comments may be worthwhile, but a call or letter to your state officials, both govt and USFS, has more impact.

While not near the hunting the west has, Florida senior residents (over 65) can hunt and fish for free with only proof of age and residence.

 

[Deleted member 107796]

Hatrick (great username!)
Thanks for that info. I have a friend in St. Augustine so we may have to check that out. cheers

 

[SmokinCrow]

I honestly think they should stop giving a certain percent to out of state hunters. Here in idaho, if we want to buy a second deer or elk tag, it has to be after the NR hunters and then we have to pay NR fees. As a lifetime resident, we are the ones paying taxes, clearing the trails, and taking care of the game throughout the year. All states should take care for their own hunters first. I don't expect montana or wyoming to put me and my hunting partners above their own. Just my 2 cents.

Honestly sounds more like poor management from the Fish and Game rather than a NR issue. Complaining about having to compete more with NR for a 2nd tag? Why should you get a 2nd tag more easily and cheeper than a NR should get a shot at a single tag? If things are getting so bad shouldn't there be fewer tags available for everyone? Why offer 2nd tags?

I understand the feelings about NR hunters but I think we all need to remember our opportunities are often affected more by management than anything. Our Fish and Game develop the management strategies which affect populations and how we get to hunt. Blaming NR for those issues is wrong. We should be working together to improve opportunities for everyone. That helps everyone with skin in the game. We should work together. I have 0 issues helping a non resident find success here in Wyoming. If I help someone here perhaps I may get an opportunity to hunt elsewhere and get assistance. Rather make friends and increase my opportunities to try new things than complain about people who have no say in management, but are willing to spend their money in my state.