Nomresident hunter rights

[itlldo]

Have watched over the years. It seem that the nonresident hunter is losing his right and they is no one to stand up for the nonresident hunter.
The Lobbyist, outfitters are make the rules. The rules say they are no tags in this unit for you!! But will let you apply for this (one) only.
But yet, we as nonresident supply a larger % of their annual budget.

Is there an organization that represents the nonresident hunter?

If there is an organization I would be glad to donate, in the interest of the nonresident hunter. As nonresidents we need to buy our own lobbyist that represents the nonresident hunter is the only way changes will be made.

For instants (the old )to hunt the wilderness Wyoming you must use an outfitter.
Also that can not apply for this tag, in most states 10 % in few units.

In most cases those tags are issued are used on federal lands money.

There's a large %of the nonresidents Hunter's out there that would like the opportunity to hunt some of these units. We all want the same thing the chance to hunt.

 

[ivorytip]

can i come hunt on some of your secret spots in arkansas for whitetails?

 

[libidilatimmy]

As far as Wyoming is concerned, a non-resident hunter must be with a 'guide' only in areas designated as wilderness. An 'outfitter' and a 'guide' are classified as two separate entities per statute. Basically, any resident with knowledge of the area to be hunted can get a guide license from the local game warden and accompany a non-resident to be within the realm of this rule.

 

[CoHiCntry]

What if you don't know anybody in Wyoming?

 

[libidilatimmy]

I was just pointing out the fact that a non-resident doesn't necessarily have to employ the services of an outfitter, if he/she has some connections, in order to hunt wilderness. If a non-resident doesn't know a resident that has familiarity of the area to be hunted, then yes an outfitter would be required.

 

[Red Raider]

This issue is what's got Colorado DOW in a bind. Federal money and NR hunters pay the majority of the revenue for the DOW (I think 65%). However, they have zero say in how the Federal lands are allocated. They are losing NR participation and it's killing their bottom line. However, they will not stand up to the locals.

When it was 60/40 for draw units, I thought that favored the NR's to much. They then went to 80/20 which was to much the other way. The locals scream like gut shot yotes anytime you mention changing it to some thing like 70/30. The point creep is more than 1 point a year for NR. That's why you are seeing more tags being allocated to the landowners in an attempt to get more tags in the hands of NR without changing the to percent allocations.

The Western DOW's need money to operate. The majority of the funding comes from Federal Grants and NR fees. They're going to do whatever it takes to maximize these revenue streams. The residents don't want the NR to have anymore tags so the DOW's get more
tags to the Landowners so they can get them to NR and get the revenue. It's simple economics.

Unfortunately, unless the residents are willing to share a larger percent of the tags with NR, you are going to see more and more tags go to landowners. It follows the money.

 

[itlldo]

The nonresident has no one to represent him. The nonresidents need representation in the legislation and we need lobbyists to do that. There should be some way to organize the nonresidents.

Just think you might spend a couple hundred dollars less and have more opportunities on tags.

And I'm just not talking about Wyoming there are many Eastern states to.

Since there is no organization like this once needs to be started.

Thanks you for my Wyoming bull moose tag, 27 encounters seen 19 bull, had fun and it sure is good eating.

 

[AKaviator]

The issue of non-resident hunting opportunities comes up a lot in Alaska. Many residents push for a 10% cap on N-R allocation for all of the main species. We have a 10% cap for some hunts already.

Certainly our tag fees for the non-res are higher than a resident pays, but they are less than in many states that I have looked at. Black bear-$225, Moose-$400, Caribou-$325, Deer-$150.

Alaska requires non-res to be guided for Sheep, Brown/Grizzly and Goat. I have seen several residents push for moose to be a "guide required" animal as well.

What do you all think is reasonable and fair. What does your state allocate for the non-resident?

I seldom hunt out of Alaska except for upland birds. I do buy points in a couple states for the future. I hope to be able to hunt big game in the "lower 48" again someday but I expect to hire a guide or pay a property owner. It's tough to pre-season scout from here!

 

[Fink]

Have watched over the years. It seem that the nonresident hunter is losing his right and they is no one to stand up for the nonresident hunter.
The Lobbyist, outfitters are make the rules. The rules say they are no tags in this unit for you!! But will let you apply for this (one) only.
But yet, we as nonresident supply a larger % of their annual budget.

Is there an organization that represents the nonresident hunter?

If there is an organization I would be glad to donate, in the interest of the nonresident hunter. As nonresidents we need to buy our own lobbyist that represents the nonresident hunter is the only way changes will be made.

For instants (the old )to hunt the wilderness Wyoming you must use an outfitter.
Also that can not apply for this tag, in most states 10 % in few units.

In most cases those tags are issued are used on federal lands money.

There's a large %of the nonresidents Hunter's out there that would like the opportunity to hunt some of these units. We all want the same thing the chance to hunt.

Big game herds are a finite resource. What makes you think that you, as an Arkansas resident, are more deserving of a coveted WY big game tag that even RESIDENTS have waited years to draw.

The only way to increase your chances to hunt, is to continue to support groups like the RMEF, DU, Pheasants Forever, etc... As herds increase, so does your probability of hunting them. Poaching opportunity from the people that make their living in the state really isn't the answer.

 

[Eberle]

The wilderness area in WY requiring a guide/outfitter is a safety issue to protect the NR Hunter. As far as federal land, yes we all pay federal taxes. Just remember the wildlife belongs to the state. Wyoming is generous to the NR, that is why continue returning every year.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

There is a lot I don't know about how states determine quotas for residents & non residents for hunting big game. But there are a few things I do Know, especially Colorado. In Colorado NR allocations are determined by the average number of points a resident needed to draw a specific tag during a 3 year period ending in 2009. Some units with low numbers of tags may not have any tags left for NR after the resident tags are draw. (I know there are very few units like this)

For units/hunt codes requiring 6 or more resident points for a resident, up to 20% may be allocated to NR tags.

For units requiring fewer than 6 points, up to 35%may be allocated to NR tags.

Up to 15%of tags in units that are totally limited are allocated for deeded landowners with at least 160 contiguous acres of agricultural land. This is where the outfitters get their licenses/vouchers...which mostly go to NRs.

If you really look at these formulas, you will see it is possible for up to 50% of the tags in some units to be set aside out of the drawing for residents. The resident arn't getting all the tags, thats for sure.

I researched the Wyoming NR brochure and could not find any relationship breakdown between res & NR tag allocation.

Bottom line at least here in Colorado is that NR hunters are paying a lot more than residents (I am sure it is the same in every state), but in my opinion are getting a fair share of the tags. In the real "blue chip" units that take lots of points, it may be almost impossible to draw a tag.....for resident and nonresidents alike for many years. What really ticks of a lot of us resident is the 15% allocation for landowners. Its hard to swallow for me. Our Parks & Wildlife Commission is packed with landowner and outfitter members. It will probably never change.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

The wilderness area in WY requiring a guide/outfitter is a safety issue to protect the NR Hunter

All the western states have wilderness, why is Wyoming the only state with this requirement? Me thinks outfitters have lots of clout with the state, just like Colorado! Safety is just a smoke screen.

 

[tdcour]

I wish there were better odds for non-residents to hunt in certain states, but the fact is that with western hunting gaining popularity for whatever reason (over crowing back east, different species, different environment, etc.), there are more applications being put in by non-residents, but also by residents.

I agree with Fink that wildlife are a resource that needs to be taken care of, so if it takes me 10 years or more to draw a high value tag, I'm ok with that. If I didn't want to wait that long, I could do OTC in some states, but the fact of the matter is that as a NR my tag is much more expensive than a resident, but the residents also have to pay state taxes that we don't have to pay. Those state taxes make up and exceed what I will spend on a trip out of state. In short, I'm ok with having to wait longer and pay more to hunt out of state because I'm a guest of that state to hunt one of their resources that they have most likely been paying for, in some way or another, much longer than I have/will.

I can't get enough of western hunting in the open spaces away from the tree stand, so I'm ok with paying more for tags as long as we still have a decent chance of hunting somewhere that I can get out and roam the wilderness.

 

[BKC]

I do know that, here in Colorado, 365 days out of the year a nonres can enjoy all the public land that a res can and for the exact same cost. Now if you want to use that land to persue big game or fish then you must adhere to the state rules because all big game and fish belong to the state. I do not see a lack of out of state vehicles at trailhead access points ( in fact if you have some white paint on your truck it is from me trying to turn my gooseneck horse trailer around). I think the law of supply and demand exists within our pricing system for out of state tags. Colorado needs you to buy tags and spend money in our small towns. If enough of nonres choose not to hunt or fish in our state then all costs and license allocation percentage could change but don't count on that happening. Hunters and fishers choose this state for a reason!

 

[Musket Man]

I think residents should come first but nonresidents should have some opportunity to hunt too. I think generally speaking 20% to nonresidents is reasonable. Some states could give nonresidents a little more. Idaho for example, nonresidents can draw up to 10% of tags but are not guaranteed any tags. I am ok with the 10% but it would be nice if they would at least separate the resident and nonresident draws and give nonresidents a strait up chance at 10% of the tags after having to buy a $150 hunting license just to apply.

 

[sreekers]

First off, hunting is a privilege, not a right.

Next up, the Wyoming law is flat wrong. It is something the outfitters have a lot of pull in keeping.

Next up, Residents do have a higher vested interest. We go to the meetings, we see the winter range, and see the effects of drought on the animals and their habitat. That information is valuable to every state agency.

Do i feel like i should pay more as a resident, well yes. I fought against price increases for you as a NR, because i am ok with you enjoying the resource here and as a fellow hunter i don't want to see others alienated.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Muleys 24/7]

All the western states have wilderness, why is Wyoming the only state with this requirement? Me thinks outfitters have lots of clout with the state, just like Colorado! Safety is just a smoke screen.

Well said cc

 

[CoHiCntry]

The wilderness area in WY requiring a guide/outfitter is a safety issue to protect the NR Hunter.

That's interesting, I haven't heard that one before. Not trying to bust your chops but could you expand a little on where you've heard or read this and what safety issues their protecting NR from? Thanks.

 

[wapiti66]

A guide in Wyoming told me that too many NRs were getting lost in the wilderness areas and search and rescue teams were being called out a lot to find NR hunters/hikers costing big bucks. I guess they (wyoming) are protecting you from yourself so that you don't go get lost in the vast wilderness. Im not buying into that myself, if that were the case many other states would be doing it, and would have similar problems with NRs getting lost. It's about $ in my opinion.

 

[tdcour]

A guide in Wyoming told me that too many NRs were getting lost in the wilderness areas and search and rescue teams were being called out a lot to find NR hunters/hikers costing big bucks. I guess they (wyoming) are protecting you from yourself so that you don't go get lost in the vast wilderness. Im not buying into that myself, if that were the case many other states would be doing it, and would have similar problems with NRs getting lost. It's about $ in my opinion.

I'm not so sure who just bails off into a wilderness area without so much as a map and compass or GPS anymore. Especially someone who doesn't know the area very well! I have to agree that its about dollars. Its similar in New Mexico with draw odds. If you apply with an outfitter you usually have a much better chance at a tag as a NR than you do if you just apply by yourself. It all comes down to dollars, but if those dollars are helping to preserve the game then I don't mind as much, but it sure is hard getting over the "sticker shock" of a tag/license these days!