HB149...60/40 take 2

jims,

You first, how is that legislation to increase NR sheep, moose, and goat tags to 25% going in Colorado?

I want me a CO sheep tag and since my State gives NR's 25% I expect the same from Colorado.

Found a bill sponsor yet? Colorado NR's are counting on you jims, we need to solidify our standing as NR's in Colorado.

Buzz, you are running circles around my yes or no question! I smell a skunk!!!!

If you aren't willing to answer my simple question there is likely a good reason why a Wyo resident would be pushing so hard for the 60/40 bill to fail! Yesterday was a sad day for DIY/OYO nonres hunters!

Buzz which side of the fence are you going to be on in regard to bills to cut nonres DIY/OYO tags?

I asked you a simple question jims...you cant answer?

How is that legislation?

I believe Colo is probably the most nonres friendly state in the West. Colo offers unlimited elk tags to nonres and there are a multitude of deer units that take less than and handful of pref pts to draw. You are correct that Colo limits high demand sheep, mtn goat, and moose tags that BOTH residents and nonres will be lucky to draw in their lifetimes. There is no comparison to how many nonres elk and deer tags Colo issues to nonres compared to Wyoming!

Ok Buzz, I answered your question. Now answer mine. What side of the fence are you going to be on when bills come up to limite nonres deer, elk, and antelope tags? If you aren't willing to answer this question we all know why you were lobbying so hard for the 60/40 to fail.

Buzz, are you ready to answer my simple question?

jims, I asked specifically how the legislation is going to increase NR sheep, moose, and goat tags in Colorado from the current 10% to 25%?

You seem very unwilling to support and help NR hunters of Colorado by increasing tag allocations for those species to what Wyoming currently offers NR hunters, 25%.

Are you going to step up for NR's or not?

jims,

I guess all of us completely uneducated and ignorant folks should be thanking you for trying to save us from issues that don't even exist.

If you don't get the issues here and haven't had the light come on, I doubt it's going to happen.

Enjoy your special tags.

Obviously you guys will never see eye to eye, and that's ok. It's still AMERICA! I don't know either of you so I will ask this of both of you that are far more knowledable than I;

Jim, please see my question above and answer if you can. I admit I am not very educated about politics, legislation, or draw odds. I just want to know whats best for me and the average nonres. hunter that wants to come to WY every year. I can support a 10% fee increase for Res. and Nonres. - that's easier to swallow than having to buy Special tags to take my family hunting every year.

Buzz, I believe Jim is accusing you of supporting changes that would give a higher percentage of tags to residents and a lower percentage to non residents than we currently get. Is this the case?

Muskeez,

For deer, elk and antelope at this time, I would not support any decrease in tag allocations for NR hunters. I reserve the right to change my position based on what happens with deer going LQ statewide for example, or elk/antelope numbers declining. But, at current levels and current regulations, I am not for any decrease in NR opportunities.

For sheep, moose, goat and bison I would like to see Resident opportunities increase to 90% of the tags going to Residents first and 10% of available opportunity going to NR hunters. That is the case in all the surrounding states and there is an adjustment needed since R interest in those species has increased while over-all tag numbers have declined.

Muskeez, Thanks for your response! The main reason I have been pulling for the 60/40 to pass is exactly what you mentioned. Wyo res are currently upset that they don't have more available tags. Where do you think those tags will come from? If 60/40 would have passed there would have been more revenue for the WG&F. In lean years like 2014 the revenue would be less than in years when more tags are issued. If Wyo nonres flip a larger proportion of tag revenue they likely would have a lot more say in what is going on with bills....in particular bills where Wyo res are asking for additional tags.

What a lot of nonres don't seem to understand is that the new revenue associated with 60/40 is only a fraction of the revenue from nonres licenses. If you add the new 60/40 revenue to what nonres pay for tags the combo of both is substantial....especially when compared to revenue generated from Wyo res. This combo of revenue would make it even that much tougher for tags to be taken from nonres.

In regard to your question ....your opportunity to hunt Wyo on a regular basis will likely decrease since the 60/40 failed. I am almost sure that Wyo res will push for an increase in tags that will be taken directly from DIY/OYO nonres hunters. You can bet outfitters will push to save these tags. They have a lot more clout in the legislature than average Joe nonres so guess who is going to loose out when funky legislation is passed?

The same number of nonres tags would have been issued if 60/40 passed. You would still have the opportunity to apply for less expensive tags. Draw odds would likely jump up and down between reg/spec tags. There is a good chance your opportunity as a nonres hunter will likely drop since 60/40 failed. A lot of guys didn't seem to see this coming...but I can almost guarantee that things don't look very bright for you and your family hunting Wyo on a regular basis since this didn't pass.

I hope all of you see the writing on the wall since 60/40 failed. I wouldn't be so upset if I didn't think so strongly about what it means to DIY/OYO nonres hunters. It's obvious to me that Buzz used many of those on this website to his own advantage as a Wyo res.

So what is it Buzz, all of us are waiting to hear which side you will be supporting once Wyo res bills are on the board to take tags away from DIY/OYO nonres hunters?

jims,

Your argument that by NR paying 240k to 400k more per year in to a 74million dollar budget, they would in some way shelter their allocation of tag quotas is IMO silly. NR already contribute a very significant portion of the WY G&F budget, I highly doubt that another 1-2% is going to seal the deal and put an iron curtain around those tag quotas.

WYOGA was pushing this and it lost. How do you then infer that WYOGA is goinig to automatically get their way?

You seem to want to freely interchange the MSG permits with deer and elk. You laud the fact that CO is generous in its deer and elk tags, which is great. CO allocates 10% MSG to NR, correct? Why is it okay for your home state to do this, but so wrong for WY to consider it?

The scary part is that, I think, jims truly believes what he is saying.

What a lot of nonres don't seem to understand is that the new revenue associated with 60/40 is only a fraction of the revenue from nonres licenses. If you add the new 60/40 revenue to what nonres pay for tags the combo of both is substantial....especially when compared to revenue generated from Wyo res. This combo of revenue would make it even that much tougher for tags to be taken from nonres.

Click to expand...

Are talking about the estimated $200k, $400, or even $500k increase that Buzz referenced in the fiscal note? If so, you realize that equates to 0.67% of the budget at the $500k mark right? That's called rounding.

I hope all of you see the writing on the wall since 60/40 failed. I wouldn't be so upset if I didn't think so strongly about what it means to DIY/OYO nonres hunters.

Click to expand...

You're overstating this significance to the DIY/OYO, it means DIY/OYO hunters won't have to pay more. It means those that are willing to take the bait of higher costs lose. You cannot equate a price increase for those that can afford it to a tag allocation change to "market". They are similar, but in the end they are different.

At the end of the day, whether this passed or failed, special interests (read those seeking financial gain) will continue to screw with legislation.

That's good news....

OK, if you want me to agree I will. I think it would be great if Wyo went to 10% tags for nonres sheep, goat, and moose. That would be fair to Wyo res.....however, it will just screw those nonres that started applying years ago and spent a lot of $ over the years paying for pref pts. The issue of deer, elk, and antelope is totally different. The revenue sum of the 40/60 plus what nonres already contribute is a definite chunk of budget and revenue. The addition of the 40/60 revenue would only make it that much tougher for special interests to swag tags from DIY/OYO nonres hunters.

I think I would be a lot happier that if 60/40 passes that there likely won't fee increases for a while and that nonres tag allocations are pretty darn safe. The reason I am so concerned when this didn't pass is it makes it easier for res, outfitters, and special interest groups to start swallowing up nonres tags that all of us DIY/OYO hunters currently have access to. You may be paying a little less for regular priced tags when 60/40 failed but your opportunity for drawing tags will likely drop!

It still appears that some of you are willing to pay a little more for tags but aren't afraid that you may loose opportunity when tags get swept out from under your feet...which is a lot likelier to happen since 60/40 failed.

If I knew that this wasn't going to happen I would be on cloud-9 that 60/40 failed....but with it failing nonres hunters have a lot to be concerned about in the near future!

jims,

The total allocation of tags has not changed for NR hunters...still the same its always been.

There was nothing with hb149 that would make that tag allocation "tougher" to take away from NR's. At the end of the day, if enough Residents decide they want to slash NR quotas, its going to happen no matter if 40-50-60-or even 100% of the tags are in the special pool.

I have not heard "much" about wanting to reduce allocations for NR elk, deer, and pronghorn. That's a good thing considering deer and antelope are doing about as poorly as they ever have.

jims said:

The reason I am so concerned when this didn't pass is it makes it easier for res, outfitters, and special interest groups to start swallowing up nonres tags that all of us DIY/OYO hunters currently have access to

Click to expand...

You are confusing me here. This bill was from none other than WYOGA. I doubt WYOGA asked for this to protect the OYO/DIY guy. Do you think WYOGA had altruistic motives in pushing this bill and they were trying to help all of us Hunt Talkers?

If were refereeing this fight, which I'm not, I would have called this a TKO about 40 posts ago and declared Buzz the winner.

We were talking about a small slice of the overall revenue pie for one and 2, Wyoming isn't likely to cut a bunch of NR tags and replace them with resident tags at a fraction of the monetary value. Money talks with these people.

Average out of state hunters win with this ruling. The discussions can and will come around again for tag fee increases and the arguments will continue. Raising fees modestly for resident tags would make the most sense although not politically appealing for local legislators. Most of us with a little common sense can figure that out.

JLS, How many times do I have to say it....I could care less who supported the 60/40 bill! It's obviuos that most guys can't get past that fact! Just because the WYOGA supports a bill doesn't mean that it is bad for nonres that like to DIY/OYO! Once you get past that I think you will understand what I'm talking about. If the WYOGA has a motive it was to solidify tags for nonres hunters....whiich I am in favor of! Obviously a very small proportion of nonres hunt with a guide so it would actually solidify tag allotments to nonres since they will be flipping an even larger proportion of revenue.

I don't know how to get this through but if nonres are supported a larger chunk of the WG&F revenue it will be a lot tougher for res and special interest groups to squander tags from average Joe nonres hunters. I could care less what happens in the next year or so but am considering what long term affects when this bill didn't pass. If you can't understand this I guess I'm talking to the wall!

Buzz, both you and I both know that once a bill comes up to provide a higher proportion of tags to residents that you will jump all over in support of the bill! You can bet I will definitely make a point to bring this to everyone's attention! Your true colors are soon to shine!

Why shouldn't Wyoming allocate more tags to residents? It would fall in line with most other Western states, so I don't see it as an issue. Then and only than can I see special tags being more of a premium in the drawing process. I, personally, can't fault WY for following suit with other states if they choose to do so in the future. I will still hunt Wyoming and enjoy the hospitality and NR friendly establishments along the way.

John,

There is essentially no current talk of reducing NR allocations for pronghorn, elk, and deer in Wyoming. Like I stated, Residents are in high cotton with opportunity for those species.

At current population levels, there is no way I would support a reduction in NR opportunity on those species. Further, I would oppose any such legislation to try to change the allocations.

I opposed a bill in the last session that would have reduced NR quotas on deer, elk and pronghorn...and it died a swift death.

Facts matter and jims has ZERO.