160 tag loss for WY Pronghorn hunters...

Joe Schmo · Feb 20, 2018

What a load!!
I believe I’ve heard a podcast about these tags...

ScottR · Feb 20, 2018

Which orgs are they going to be set aside for?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

shootbrownelk · Feb 20, 2018

ScottR said:
Which orgs are they going to be set aside for?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One shot hunt and women's Antelope hunt?

hoshour · Feb 20, 2018

Probably. Those have been going on for years. This is not new, but it is annoying nonetheless.

Brandon Mason wrote a piece on the Eastmans' Blog about this last year http://blog.eastmans.com/dying-tradtions-the-one-shot-wonders/

They killed the women's antelope hunt last year but not the one shot event. http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/house-kills-bill-that-would-have-reserved-tags-for-women/article_db93e151-aee5-5e45-a182-391fd32416de.html

hoshour · Feb 20, 2018

I wrote Rep. Allen about the Lander One Shot Hunt last year and he wrote me back defending the hunt. Here's what he had to say.

The One Shot uses several hunt areas and only a few tags are issued in any one area and over a wide number of antelope hunting areas so there is not a significant harvest in one area. Also, the WG&F periodically changes the issuance of tags to areas with abundant populations, so that biology is fully considered. Over-harvest is not happening.

The One Shot hunt has voluntarily raised and donated $2 million dollars for materials and donated labor for hundreds of water development projects that benefit all wildlife, not just antelope. The hunt gathers donations and actually leverages license money with the donations to expand wildlife habitat and range which increases herd populations. This is accomplished over and above WG&F budget. I see this as a plus for wildlife and especially antelope. By building these water tanks on dry range, herds can build and provide MORE opportunity for other hunters.

The WG&F issues 200,000 total licenses per year, so 80 tags is a drop in the bucket.

And lastly, this hunt is really about honoring the ancient Shoshone Indian tribal hunting custom of harvesting an antelope with one arrow, not speed killing. Many One Shot hunters return to Lander w/o antelope if it is getting close to noon so they can enjoy the event in town. The Shoshone Indians live with us and this hunt is a huge community relations deal. They participate in this event and are an integral part of the hunt. You must understand the importance and value of this relationship with our neighbors.

Thank you for coming to Wyoming to enjoy our wildlife and help support it with license money. We appreciate your input and dedication to wildlife.

Best Regards,
Jim

Representative Jim Allen
House Travel, Recreation and Wildlife Committee Chairman
House District 33

JM77 · Feb 21, 2018

I wonder where Rep Allen gets his information about the Shoshone involved in the One Shot. They are simply performers paid for their service by the One Shot Club. They have no say in how the hunt is run or that no women are allowed.. This was confirmed to me in conversations with two One Shot board members. Also, there is alcohol is present at the events surrounding the One Shot and there is no drinking allowed at any Indian events.

As far as antelope tags, there are upwards of 28-29 tags taken from one of the One Shot areas, and they do effect the opportunity of regular hunters.

This is what the One Shot losing teams are dressed up like for a "Round Dance" with Indian women.

Tim McCoy · Feb 21, 2018

hoshour said:
I wrote Rep. Allen about the Lander One Shot Hunt last year and he wrote me back defending the hunt. Here's what he had to say.

The One Shot uses several hunt areas and only a few tags are issued in any one area and over a wide number of antelope hunting areas so there is not a significant harvest in one area. Also, the WG&F periodically changes the issuance of tags to areas with abundant populations, so that biology is fully considered. Over-harvest is not happening.

The One Shot hunt has voluntarily raised and donated $2 million dollars for materials and donated labor for hundreds of water development projects that benefit all wildlife, not just antelope. The hunt gathers donations and actually leverages license money with the donations to expand wildlife habitat and range which increases herd populations. This is accomplished over and above WG&F budget. I see this as a plus for wildlife and especially antelope. By building these water tanks on dry range, herds can build and provide MORE opportunity for other hunters.

The WG&F issues 200,000 total licenses per year, so 80 tags is a drop in the bucket.

And lastly, this hunt is really about honoring the ancient Shoshone Indian tribal hunting custom of harvesting an antelope with one arrow, not speed killing. Many One Shot hunters return to Lander w/o antelope if it is getting close to noon so they can enjoy the event in town. The Shoshone Indians live with us and this hunt is a huge community relations deal. They participate in this event and are an integral part of the hunt. You must understand the importance and value of this relationship with our neighbors.

Thank you for coming to Wyoming to enjoy our wildlife and help support it with license money. We appreciate your input and dedication to wildlife.

Best Regards,
Jim

Representative Jim Allen
House Travel, Recreation and Wildlife Committee Chairman
House District 33

He makes a good argument for the one shot. Aren’t there left over tags for antelope most years?

JM77 · Feb 21, 2018

Tim McCoy said:
He makes a good argument for the one shot. Aren’t there left over tags for antelope most years?

The areas the One Shot hunts are all trophy areas that are subscribed to in the first round of the drawing. There are no leftovers. The "easiest" area to draw for residents, is 68 at 38%. All five areas are very low odds for NR.

On the outside, his argument seems good. But even Water for Wildlife sends most of it's money out of Wyoming, which is where it should stay to fund projects. After all, these are Wyoming resources being used to fund this hunt.

Tim McCoy · Feb 21, 2018

JM77 said:
The areas the One Shot hunts are all trophy areas that are subscribed to in the first round of the drawing. There are no leftovers. The "easiest" area to draw for residents, is 68 at 38%. All five areas are very low odds for NR.

On the outside, his argument seems good. But even Water for Wildlife sends most of it's money out of Wyoming, which is where it should stay to fund projects. After all, these are Wyoming resources being used to fund this hunt.

So it reduces "trophy" opportunity, not overall opportunity, that fair?

Seems the $ should stay in WY or if used outside WY, benefit WY wildlife.

Makes it a good old boy tradition IMO. Politics and $...

hoshour · Feb 21, 2018

Here are my issues with Rep. Allen's response:

1) Tags from several areas - JM77 answered that well - up to 28 tags from a unit - that really affects nonresident opportunity, especially when you throw in landowner tags of which nonresident landowners take from the small nonresident pool

2) Only 80 tags out of 200,000 WY licenses - 56,000 antelope licenses is the proper comparison, but that's too high, too. What matters is the percentage of tags in the units they hunt.

3) 80 tags is about to double to 160 tags with the women getting a similar hunt

4) Community relations with the Indians - serving alcohol? I wonder how many Indians actually participate in the hunt. No, community relations done right would be with the Indians participating in planning, officiating and hunting. This is pretty much the plantation dove shoot for the rich and influential while another group serves.

5) Raised $2 million for water projects - yes, over 40+ years. That works out to $50K per year and 40% of the past projects have been in Wyoming, so $20K per year for WY, just taking a simple average.

According to https://oneshotantelopehunt.com/history/one-shot-foundation/ "By 2015, the Water For Wildlife program had completed a total of 435 water projects; 24 in Arizona, 4 in California, 64 in Colorado, 22 in Idaho, 34 in Kansas, 4 in Nevada, 7 in New Mexico, 32 in Oklahoma, 1 in South Dakota, 8 in Texas, 59 in Utah and 174 projects in Wyoming."

See, it's one thing to auction off 1 coveted tag for hundreds of thousands of dollars to help pay for WY conservation and it's probably somewhere within the realm of reason to charge nonresidents many times what residents pay and for fewer tags, but it is another thing to give away 80 or 160 licenses for a total WY conservation benefit that averages out to $20k/year.

This is more than anything a good old boy (and woman) private hunt where Indians are there for entertainment and nonresidents lose out on tags again. But hey, there's always more antelope and always more nonresidents, right?

JM77 · Feb 22, 2018

I want to go on the record and say, while I don't support set aside licenses, I think the women's hunt is genuine. I have watched some of the videos, looked at their Facebook page and talked to people who have attended. The event has exposed many women to hunting and many of those women are genuinely excited and overwhelmed at the experience. The women's hunt says 40 tags would satisfy them to conduct their hunt to the fullest. After all, the areas they hunt are 100% draw with some leftovers.

But the One Shot men's hunt is a totally different story. I see no honor here. This is "good ole boys" tradition that's time has come and that has wore out it's welcome. The fact the competition is about using one bullet is troubling, before we even get to the exclusiveness of a men's only hunt. I will leave it to anyone interested to see what kind of men encompass the teams I can find pictures of. Beyond that, the blatant disregard of women in their "stag" events and their losers Round Dance, where hunt members dress like Indian women, is appalling.

If all that isn't bad enough, the men reward each other with 56 antelope licenses for past members not in the actual One Shot event. Last but not least, the mythical idea that it is Shoshone indians that require only a man can hunt. This is totally false, as the Indians are paid to perform and have absolutely no say in the hunt.

I say keep it 80 tags in the statute and give each hunt 40. I have a feeling the men's hunt is going to be a casualty of modern times anyway.

brushcreek · Feb 22, 2018

living in Arkansas, the concept of the legislature getting directly involved in tag numbers and hunting season is foreign and frankly very discouraging. I assume this is common in Western states?

hoshour · Feb 22, 2018

brushcreek said:
living in Arkansas, the concept of the legislature getting directly involved in tag numbers and hunting season is foreign and frankly very discouraging. I assume this is common in Western states?

That's where the nonresidents caps come from - the legislatures, not the wildlife departments. When a state like Oregon restricts nonresident tags to 5%, that's a whole lot of money the Department misses out on because nonresidents each pay hundreds of dollars more per tag not to mention the greater travel expenditures. While I hate the prices, and they are really putting the screws to us locally nonvoting hunters, I appreciate the more enlightened states like Wyoming and Colorado that give a much larger cut of the license pool to nonresidents.

Someone will plead that some residents invest a lot of volunteer time, most buy their guns and ammo and supplies there, pay taxes there and some participate in local feedback, and that is all true, but when it comes to revenue from license and tag sales to support the wildlife departments, nonresidents pay by far the lion's share, a share that keeps going up dramatically while resident license increases don't even keep up with a 2 or 3% general inflation rate.

The State of Colorado said when they finally raised resident licenses that the lowly Consumer Price Index had gone up 37% since way back when at the last resident price increase and then proceeded to ask for no more than a 21% increase for residents, which keeps the cost of a CO deer license at $31, about the cost of a movie and popcorn for two while nonresidents pay 13X as much at almost $400.

Wyoming now charges roughly 20X the resident cost for a nonresident bighorn sheep license but the biggest disparity I know of is Montana where I will likely pay just shy of $900 for a general elk license plus travel costs back and forth from NC to MT, while a resident pays $29. That's 30X the cost just for the license.

Apparently the max we addicts will pay to hunt out of state is still well above what they are charging us and I expect it will just keep going up. Economists call that low elasticity of demand, meaning the demand hardly changes in response to big increases in prices. What a corporation would do is keep raising prices until the drop in demand started generating an overall decline in revenue. Apple is playing that game with its new iPhone. It's a scary thought for hunters.

On the other hand, what business can get away with charging the customers that provide the largest share of the company's income 20-30X what they charge other customers? That's a hell of a local discount. Only government can come up with that plan, and from their standpoint it seems to be still working.

shootbrownelk · Feb 23, 2018

BuzzH said:
Hoshour,

You forgot the water project that was completed in South Africa...a real nice way to spend money that my States Wildlife paid for.

That's right Buzz, I forgot about that. Water for Wildlife in Africa. What a crock.

Bonecollector · Feb 23, 2018

BuzzH said:
Not the case in Wyoming, some of the caps are in regulation, and some are in statute.

Plus, the way the Statute's read on the species covered under statutes, the Commission has the authority to adjust the nr "caps" to zero if they want.

The ones in regulation can be changed at any time by the commission without any legislative meddling at all.

Sound a lot like Government to me...

hoshour · Feb 23, 2018

BuzzH said:
Not the case in Wyoming, some of the caps are in regulation, and some are in statute.

Plus, the way the Statute's read on the species covered under statutes, the Commission has the authority to adjust the nr "caps" to zero if they want.

The ones in regulation can be changed at any time by the commission without any legislative meddling at all.

I was referring to low, hard caps as in Oregon that hurt G&F revenues. I'm not afraid of G&F Depts. because they generally get it, I'm afraid of local pressure on legislators to lower nonresident caps and make them law.

160 tag loss for WY Pronghorn hunters...

Very Active Member

Member

Eastmans' Staff / Moderator

Veteran member

Veteran member

Veteran member

Member

Veteran member

Member

Veteran member

Veteran member

Member

Very Active Member

Active Member

Veteran member

Veteran member

Very Active Member

Veteran member

Veteran member