WY 90/10 Deer/Elk/Antelope Question

[ColoradoV]

I would have been a 3 rd generation wyomingite but my grandfather decided to move to central Colorado in the early 40’s just after my father was born. Who can blame him as Aspen and the Roaring Fork valley is just a bit nicer place to exist than Rock Springs or even Alpine for that matter. .. Point being if your family spent 3-4 generations in Wyo you deserve 90-10..

Wyo can do what it wants. I have quite a few points and if this change happens the wife and I can pry make 4 trips over 4 years and use guides for elk maybe deer. Going to be interesting to be the guide/owner that gets to deal w me for a deer hunt lol = better have a 200”, bust, or get the hell out my way .. Who knows we could retire up there for hunting but then again read the first paragraph or that’s still very very true…

Things are a changin all over. Colorado sent 90-10 to the commission and I bet we get 80-20 w total elimination of otc elk and pry 90-10 for deer in the next 5 year. Again totally fair to non residents.

Or I guess overall the 90-10 will have little impact on me as a nr. I will still use my small peer group to chase a much better quality of deer than there is in wyo every year here in Co.. All members of our little hunting group could live anywhere just to hunt deer and flat out wyo does not have the consistency in quality that Colorado does. I doubt even slaughtering the bucks on Thanksgiving here will change that.

I like the transferable lo tags or year I should be getting another 3-4 late or rifle season deer lo tags in a great area - from a buddy who is just happy not to have to file the paperwork anymore. Along w the ones I get for archery
it will fill out the year. So I guess I don’t have the time to bitch or worry about what Wyoming boys want to do w their wildlife as I am serious enough to have made a life chasing bigger ones here in Co. Or if done right almost no one no matter how good has the time to hunt more than one state and these “professional hunters” w 4 elk tags and 3 deer tags in a year are actually the problem. Nr expectations need to change.

Funny for me but the full court press of apply apply apply for every western state is finally get in seen as hustle it is.. Seems the only purpose is to bring in lemmings and make money for the folks who want nothing more than to monetize the experience…

Also I edited that to say there are obviously no big elk in Colorado just deer.. Or here is the bull that got the best of me archery in 2021…. Good luck to you Wyoming boys w your chosen path.

 

[gonhunting247]

Going to be interesting to be the guide/owner that gets to deal w me for a deer hunt lol = better have a 200”, bust, or get the hell out my way .

I have to say I had to chuckle when I read this ColoradoV, I think this will be interesting .

 

[Triple BB]

90/10 is long overdue for us residents. Overwhelming support amongst my hunting buddies that the TF comes up with something to benefit residents. I'm just waiting for Guy to come out with his next, cry me a river article, about how life isn't fair for non-residents...

 

[Alabama]

I have my first and likely only ever guided hunt booked for the Thoroughfare in 2025. Only way a NR can ever hunt that country. Honestly, with the overt hatred towards non-residents I would not give two ’s if as much federal land as possible was sold off to highest bidder and wildlife was privatized. Texas has 36 house votes compared to 31 votes for the combined total of NM, CO, WY, MT, WY, ID, UT, NV and ID combined. Probably less than 1% of Texas voters give a single damn about public lands, I would venture 99% don’t even know public lands exist. Talk about an easy sell to raise revenue and offset deficit. Burn. It. Down. (This is mostly tongue in cheek on my part but an easy sell around here).

Man, I hope you are in the minority. I don't think there is an overt hatred toward NR. I think the residents just want a bigger cut and the WOGA is willing to sell us out for half of what remains. The outfitters pretended to care about NR, but they do not care one bit about anyone but themselves. They just want their repeat wealthy clients. If this passes it will probably actually be easier for the wealthy to draw as most of us can't afford guided hunts. We will be left fighting over 5% in high demand and 10% in lower demand units for antelope/deer or 5% and 8% in the case of elk. The outfitters are proposing this as a "compromise" but the only group that is giving up anything is the group that has no say. If the outfitters operated as all other businesses out there, then they would thrive or fail based on the quality of their work and the experience they are selling. They already have a monopoly on all the wilderness areas unlike every other state in the union.

WY definitely has the right to do what they wish with the wildlife within their borders, but I hope they will continue the tradition of allowing equal access to guided/non-guided NR sportsmen. I think we should all send our comments to the task force with our reasonable and respectful opinions. To think we won't lose some opportunity is Naive. I wish we could give up some portion to the resident draw while keeping the outfitter set-aside to 0.

Regardless of what happens I will continue to support public lands and the huge benefits they provide to the wildlife of this nation. I want wildlife to thrive even if I never get the opportunity to hunt them. I am also opposed to the privatization of wildlife, but if that's what you really want then you should be all for this. This is giving a huge advantage to those with deep pockets and eliminating those without. Giving outfitters a guaranteed number of clients based off a public resource is the very definition of privatization.

AS for the deficit and selling off lands, I invite you to look back in history. Do you think the one-time sale of lands is worth more than owning those lands in perpetuity? You think Spain would rather have the meager $5 million in 1820 (or there about) or all the wealth Florida has amassed in the last 200 years? What about France with the Louisiana purchase? Even more recently with the purchase of Alaska from Russia? I bet if they could go back our country would be a lot smaller. Our public lands are worth trillions in future earnings if we could get out of our own way. The oil, natural gas, and subsurface minerals are largely untapped and could be extracted in an environmentally friendly way. If we could stop endless lawsuits, then there would be a huge logging industry that could pour tons of money into local economies, those states, and tax dollars into the federal coffers. Grazing permits could be raised to what they are actually worth and managed better. These funds could even be ear marked for the fixed FS and BLM budgets with the surplus being directed towards the deficit. The financial reasons for owning them is enough to keep them but the social advantages are numerous too. Wildlife watchers, hunters, anglers, campers, hikers, mountain bikers, mountain climbers, rafters, atv/utv riders, dirt bikers, snow mobile riders, skiers etc (I'm sure some I'm forgetting some) all enjoy these lands.

That's doesn't even cover the critical winter range these lands protect. Do you think if they were private that the winter range (where we normally build) would receive those same protections? I've never seen wild places filled with life and thought to myself " You know what we need here? Concrete!"

 

[Rich M]

I laugh when folks talk about selling off the land. Thats the whole “if i can’t, nobody can” attitude and something that most kids lose after a while. Adults w this attitude need some therapy. We don’t alwsys get what we want and need to be mature about it.

Likewise, Give it 5 years of not being able to hunt and moving on to something that you can actually spend your free time and money on, then let the former hunters tell us how much they are concerned about the animals, public land access, etc.

Yes, WY and all the other states can do what they want. We are also allowed to react however it is that we want. I do like the idea of setting some parameters on the PR funds and how it gets used. But at this point can care less.

I pretty much feel pushed out of hunting via lack of opportunities and overall expense. Sure can fight for more opportunity by applying more places, hunting mice, and sacrificing $ in other areas to blow it on hunting. All that does is frustrate. Hanging on but know the inevitable end of the story. Is it worth fighting for? Is it worth only going every 3-5-10 years? There comes a point where the time delay and expense isn’t worth it.

 

[Prerylyon]

I'm grateful I got to hunt in WY in 2014, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021.

Time will tell if and when I come back.

I'll apply, for sure; but at some point, if it gets so convoluted, expensive or low odds; it will be time to spend my money elsewhere.

This proposal sucks for the DIY non resident hunter.

 

[DoubleDropMuley]

so is this nation .

Nothing truer has been spoken

 

[Prerylyon]

I'll get razzed for suggesting it, but If WY goes with this, they should offer non-residents who started in the current system some kind of way out:

1. Outright return of all preference point fees

2. Anyone with > 5pts can cash them out for 1 'general' tag/species (they can make one up for antelope, for this purpose), spread out over a few years by a lottery to manage the additional load of hunters, if necessary

It's not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game, sorry.

And with that, I have a brisket that needs some TLC...

 

[Alabama]

I laugh when folks talk about selling off the land. Thats the whole “if i can’t, nobody can” attitude and something that most kids lose after a while. Adults w this attitude need some therapy. We don’t alwsys get what we want and need to be mature about it.

Likewise, Give it 5 years of not being able to hunt and moving on to something that you can actually spend your free time and money on, then let the former hunters tell us how much they are concerned about the animals, public land access, etc.

Yes, WY and all the other states can do what they want. We are also allowed to react however it is that we want. I do like the idea of setting some parameters on the PR funds and how it gets used. But at this point can care less.

I pretty much feel pushed out of hunting via lack of opportunities and overall expense. Sure can fight for more opportunity by applying more places, hunting mice, and sacrificing $ in other areas to blow it on hunting. All that does is frustrate. Hanging on but know the inevitable end of the story. Is it worth fighting for? Is it worth only going every 3-5-10 years? There comes a point where the time delay and expense isn’t worth it.

That's what worries me most about proposals like this. If this goes through then there will be a massive shift in support for public lands and access. Most people only care about issues that directly affect them. If someone is locked out of their favorite activity on these lands then they will not support it for long. Growing apathy towards public lands will lead to likelihood of their eventual transfer to states or selling to the highest bidder. Utah senators should celebrate.

When I said WY can do what they want, all I meant was wildlife is owned by the states. It is set in precedent throughout our history (with obvious exceptions: migratory waterfowl that pass through multiple states and/or countries and Endangered species). Could it be changed or modified? Absolutely. Should PR funds be reduced to states that limit NR participation on public lands? Maybe. Oregon should be at the top of that list!

I feel pushed out because of expense and overall lack of opportunity as well. An explosion of apps has cut opportunity drastically and now we have proposals to cut tags for NR in the 2 most popular states in the west. I don't want to see our opportunity diminish but I think these proposals have gained too much momentum that we will see some loss no matter what we do.

We should all speak up and send in our comments to the task force. I was saying to be respectful with reasonable proposals because an enraged rant about selling lands or quitting applying will go in one ear and out the other. A reasoned appeal may have little impact but we have to at least try. That's the most frustrating part of this whole thing, spending money on points for all these years and then having no voice when our opportunity gets cut in half or by 75% if this goes through.

 

[Rich M]

That's what worries me most about proposals like this. If this goes through then there will be a massive shift in support for public lands and access. Most people only care about issues that directly affect them. If someone is locked out of their favorite activity on these lands then they will not support it for long. Growing apathy towards public lands will lead to likelihood of their eventual transfer to states or selling to the highest bidder. Utah senators should celebrate.

When I said WY can do what they want, all I meant was wildlife is owned by the states. It is set in precedent throughout our history (with obvious exceptions: migratory waterfowl that pass through multiple states and/or countries and Endangered species). Could it be changed or modified? Absolutely. Should PR funds be reduced to states that limit NR participation on public lands? Maybe. Oregon should be at the top of that list!

I feel pushed out because of expense and overall lack of opportunity as well. An explosion of apps has cut opportunity drastically and now we have proposals to cut tags for NR in the 2 most popular states in the west. I don't want to see our opportunity diminish but I think these proposals have gained too much momentum that we will see some loss no matter what we do.

We should all speak up and send in our comments to the task force. I was saying to be respectful with reasonable proposals because an enraged rant about selling lands or quitting applying will go in one ear and out the other. A reasoned appeal may have little impact but we have to at least try. That's the most frustrating part of this whole thing, spending money on points for all these years and then having no voice when our opportunity gets cut in half or by 75% if this goes through.

what we are lacking is a leader for this movement. We need a leader to manage the NR guys and coordinate the “attacks”. Without a charismatic leader and folks following, the battle is lost.

The W0GA already did some good damage to the NR by calling in some dude, that’s what Buzz said anyway. So, seems like some triage is necessary for NR thru no fault of our own.

seems like a regular chit show.

 

[kidoggy]

I'll get razzed for suggesting it, but If WY goes with this, they should offer non-residents who started in the current system some kind of way out:

1. Outright return of all preference point fees

2. Anyone with > 5pts can cash them out for 1 'general' tag/species (they can make one up for antelope, for this purpose), spread out over a few years by a lottery to manage the additional load of hunters, if necessary

It's not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game, sorry.

And with that, I have a brisket that needs some TLC...

life's not fair. it sucks. and then you get to die.

rules concerning money always are changed. look at social security .when people started living longer and they had to pay more they just upped the retirement age.

I am sure glad hunting any state other then Idaho never appealed to me

 

[Bonecollector]

Outside of a few select LE tags, don’t Wyoming residents get handed cheap general tags for most species such as antelope, deer, and elk in 90% of the state?This is in addition to landowner tags which do not go through the draw.
I understand the issue with moose, sheep and goat. However changes to the system will only have a minor impact but it is WY’s choice to make.

Not trying to stir the pot here but just my observation as a non-resident. It’s like this in most states with the exception of a few.

 

[BuzzH]

Outside of a few select LE tags, don’t Wyoming residents get handed cheap general tags for most species such as antelope, deer, and elk in 90% of the state?This is in addition to landowner tags which do not go through the draw.
I understand the issue with moose, sheep and goat. However changes to the system will only have a minor impact but it is WY’s choice to make.

Not trying to stir the pot here but just my observation as a non-resident. It’s like this in most states with the exception of a few.

No

 

[Rich M]

Buzz, how do you get so many tags every year? It seems like you get 10 tags a year.

 

[ScottR]

Outside of a few select LE tags, don’t Wyoming residents get handed cheap general tags for most species such as antelope, deer, and elk in 90% of the state?This is in addition to landowner tags which do not go through the draw.
I understand the issue with moose, sheep and goat. However changes to the system will only have a minor impact but it is WY’s choice to make.

Not trying to stir the pot here but just my observation as a non-resident. It’s like this in most states with the exception of a few.

The general tags are for elk and deer only, they cost exactly the same as the limited quota hunts minus application fee. However the gas to get to where we buy them might be the equivalent of that at the moment. There are far more "general deer" areas than elk, but it is not 90% of the state.

All antelope hunts for residents are draw only, with a substantial number of leftover tags usually happening in the NE corner of the state. However those don't offer much in terms of accessible public land which is challenging at best.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, how do you get so many tags every year? It seems like you get 10 tags a year.

Applying in 8-10 states. I also can buy OTC nr deer in Montana as a native Montanan born there. I buy Illinois deer OTC too.

 

[Bonecollector]

The general tags are for elk and deer only, they cost exactly the same as the limited quota hunts minus application fee. However the gas to get to where we buy them might be the equivalent of that at the moment. There are far more "general deer" areas than elk, but it is not 90% of the state.

All antelope hunts for residents are draw only, with a substantial number of leftover tags usually happening in the NW corner of the state. However those don't offer much in terms of accessible public land which is challenging at best.

Thanks Scott. I wasn’t too far off without looking it up and doing a little research. Sure beats the answer of “no” listed above which was not helpful and quite honestly less accurate than my assessment.

Good luck out there brother! Hope you pull a good deer tag this year.

 

[ScottR]

Buzz, how do you get so many tags every year? It seems like you get 10 tags a year.

I can answer for him as most of us who live here have our own strategies. In places like Tennessee or Texas one license comes with most of the options all on one. For instance I could never afford it when I was a student there but I looked into a NR hunting license. That license allowed me 3 turkeys, 2 buck whitetail deer depending on the county I was in and several does depending on management objectives. If I remember right other species were on there as well.

In Wyoming rather than lump it all into one we have to apply for each separately and can look at different areas of the state. Personally I apply for some hard to draw antlerless tags with others that are easier to get but have tougher access to fill my freezer. I used to wait for leftovers but just apply up front, way easier on the mind that way.

So nothing new, just different places and management plans.

 

[BuzzH]

Most hunters don't take the time to understand the draw process in their own states, let alone states they are nr in.

I take the time to understand the process in every state I apply in. When you savvy the process you get tags.

 

[Bonecollector]

Most hunters don't take the time to understand the draw process in their own states, let alone states they are nr in.

I take the time to understand the process in every state I apply in. When you savvy the process you get tags.

I agree and generally draw drags, multiple tags, every year as a non-resident. It was the resident data that I was only 75% sure of.