Sources of Revenue for Wyoming Game and Fish

JimP

Veteran member
Mar 28, 2016
5,312
4,156
67
Gypsum, Co
For the most part I agree with you. Where we differ is on federal lands. Wyoming has a lot of it same as my state Arkansas. So every US hunter should be able to hunt these lands. Yes they need to be managed, but not exclude Nonresidents. Wyoming does this by restricting Wilderness areas. New Mexico does this by tag allocation. I would like to see tag allocation related to amount of federal land a state has to hunt. Sure charge NR more. I am ok with that. You would think the PP game has run its course on a lot of game, but like old PT Barnum said.
If the game animals were managed by the Feds then this might be the case but the animals are managed by the state as a state resource so the states get the say so. The way that the Feds manage a lot of things I would hate to see just how they would manage the animals. But I do tip my had to the Federal Wildlife managers that are out there.

The same could be said of private property. Since it is private should the state or property owner be the one that has the say on how the animals on their property is managed? Some would go with a scorched earth policy on the animals where others would make you pay through the nose for the opportunity to hunt "their" animals.

While I don't like paying non resident fees to hunt other states it is part of the game to hunt other states. No one is twisting your arm to go out of state to hunt, it is your choice to do so.
 

Yell Co AR Hunter

Very Active Member
Dec 10, 2015
613
306
Yell County Arkansas
If the game animals were managed by the Feds then this might be the case but the animals are managed by the state as a state resource so the states get the say so. The way that the Feds manage a lot of things I would hate to see just how they would manage the animals. But I do tip my had to the Federal Wildlife managers that are out there.

The same could be said of private property. Since it is private should the state or property owner be the one that has the say on how the animals on their property is managed? Some would go with a scorched earth policy on the animals where others would make you pay through the nose for the opportunity to hunt "their" animals.

While I don't like paying non resident fees to hunt other states it is part of the game to hunt other states. No one is twisting your arm to go out of state to hunt, it is your choice to do so.
Lord no! Not saying let feds manage the game. In the States hands is where it needs to be. I am talking about access to available tags on said federal lands which needs to be set by the State.
 

nv-hunter

Veteran member
Feb 28, 2011
1,281
686
Reno
For the most part I agree with you. Where we differ is on federal lands. Wyoming has a lot of it same as my state Arkansas. So every US hunter should be able to hunt these lands. Yes they need to be managed, but not exclude Nonresidents. Wyoming does this by restricting Wilderness areas. New Mexico does this by tag allocation. I would like to see tag allocation related to amount of federal land a state has to hunt. Sure charge NR more. I am ok with that. You would think the PP game has run its course on a lot of game, but like old PT Barnum said.
Sorry but your math doesn't work, Wy is almost double the size of AR and is 48% federally owned. Whereas Ar is 9% federally owned, 10 times more federal land in Wy then in Ar. And almost equal to the entire land area of Ar.

Eye opening


For every acre of land federally owned the state doesn't get the same amount of money if it was owned privately. ( property tax )

For states with large amounts of federal property that can really affect state services to its citizens
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
540
155
Land ownership and wildlife ownership are mutually exclusive...and not by chance.

Don't really care much for the European feudal system of wildlife ownership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hilltop and Slugz

Yell Co AR Hunter

Very Active Member
Dec 10, 2015
613
306
Yell County Arkansas
Sorry but your math doesn't work, Wy is almost double the size of AR and is 48% federally owned. Whereas Ar is 9% federally owned, 10 times more federal land in Wy then in Ar. And almost equal to the entire land area of Ar.

Eye opening


For every acre of land federally owned the state doesn't get the same amount of money if it was owned privately. ( property tax )

For states with large amounts of federal property that can really affect state services to its citizens
Arkansas public land is around around 20%. The 9.4% looks correct on federal and places Arkansas at #18. I understand It is not like the Western states, but offers a lot of public hunting when you look at all the states. That is not the real point I was trying to make. The point was it is federal land not state land. I feel all Americans should have the ability to hunt federal lands. I also feel several states restrict our ability to hunt by unfair tag allocations. Just my feelings and it is ok if others don't agree.
 

D_Dubya

Active Member
Aug 8, 2012
259
425
South Texas
Land ownership and wildlife ownership are mutually exclusive...and not by chance.

Don't really care much for the European feudal system of wildlife ownership.
You could pretty much describe most of the hunting here in Texas as the feudal system ...the landowner is just about in 100% control except for season dates. 97% private and be prepared to pay dearly for a good deer lease - $6k- $8k/man/year or more. Upside is if you can swing it the hunting is outstanding. Downside is it really limits opportunities for the average guy. Cherish your public lands!
 

HuskyMusky

Veteran member
Nov 29, 2011
1,197
80
IL
I think it might be interesting to have a NR only unit....

it could be done/experimental.
maybe on federal land...
 

HuskyMusky

Veteran member
Nov 29, 2011
1,197
80
IL
that would be interesting lol. but to keep residents happy 5% of tags should be reserved for residents. ;)
I would propose... residents could apply at the NR fee price....

but 5% sounds good too.

also I'm sure maybe there'd be some leftover cow/doe opportunities for residents... to help manage our unit...
 
  • Like
Reactions: kidoggy

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
540
155
I think it would be great to have 2 draws under the current WY tag allocations. One "open" draw that is open to everyone that includes R 's being able to apply for the NR allocation. Keep the NR fees what they are Residents pay the same fees as NR, and it would also allow R's to accumulate points for deer, elk, pronghorn.

The other draw, Resident only just as it is.

Residents can apply for both draws.

Win-win-win.
 

highplainsdrifter

Very Active Member
May 4, 2011
692
88
Wyoming
Few things.

1. We live in a place where you aren't required to hunt as a NR in any state.

2. Each state has the right to manage its resources as they see fit. Meaning if they choose to, like in the case of North Dakota with moose, etc. they can keep 100% of the resource to themselves. This is the way its been for a long, long time and I agree 100% with it on the basis of constitutionality and the law, including Supreme court decisions.

3.If NR hunters don't like buying points, don't do it. Simple as that. Most all states have a random portion of the draw that you can participate in without purchasing points.

4. There is NO other state where NR's express an entitled attitude toward a States wildlife resources like that of Wyoming. NR's that hunt here have had it too good for too long, is the only reason that I can come up with for the entitled attitude. Let me be the first to say it, as a NR hunter you are NOT entitled to a single tag here. You hunt at the pleasure of what Residents are willing to give.

5. As a NR to the other 49 states that I hunt, you will never hear me complain about cost, points, or license availability. I'm a guest there and realize I hunt at the pleasure of the residents of those states. If I think that the price isn't worth the value, I just dont hunt there. What I dont do is complain and whine about how those states are "sticking it to me". Those states have the absolute right to charge what they want and allocate what they want to NR's, including giving residents no tags.

6. I don't view financially supporting a state with point fees, license fees, etc. as something that should be complained about. I care enough about wildlife that I have no problem cutting the checks, in fact, I feel pretty darn good about my money supporting what many supposedly care about. In the scheme of things, when I apply for, or hunt as a NR in 10-12 states a year, I feel the cost to manage wildlife sort of balances itself out. I may pay more to hunt MT, ID, NM, UT, IL, NV, AZ, AK, CO, OR, WA, etc. etc. But, I get a pretty big discount in the State I live in. I pay more of the freight in other states, NR's pay more of the freight here (speaking of license revenue only).

7. What isn't mentioned, past license fees, is the huge amount of NGO support and volunteer hours that Residents spend enhancing wildlife. Not many NR's are showing up to plant bitterbrush, pull fencing, lobby the legislature, attend meetings, and residents providing nearly 100% of the NGO funding that in turn, puts that money they raise on the ground in Wyoming. Volunteer hours for conservation are currently valued at $29/hour...

Finally, hunting as a NR is NOT a god-given right, its a luxury...just like its a luxury to own 2 homes, or fancy sports cars. If you want luxury items, you pay for them...I see no difference with hunting as a NR. Not everybody can afford a corvette stingray, and not everybody can afford to hunt as a NR. Thankfully, there are KIA's to drive and every hunter can hunt cheaply in the State they reside in.
Buzz, for the most part I agree. But I simply don't like the preference point system. And it's not because of the cost of buying the points. It's because it makes it very difficult to draw a license, especially if you didn't get in on the ground floor. I would like to see all states get rid of preference points and go to the bonus point system or completely random draw. I posted this because I was amazed that Wyoming now makes more money on preference points than it does on selling elk licenses, or deer licenses, or antelope licenses or fishing licenses. If they need more money, raise license fees...don't create a monster.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Colorado Cowboy

Colorado Cowboy

Veteran member
Jun 8, 2011
6,870
1,747
79
Dolores, Colorado
I have maintained my dislike of any point or preference system since they started. I believe random draw is really the only fair way to allocate tags if they are limited in the amount available for those who want them. I also believe in the premium draw areas that those who are successful should be not allowed to apply again for a certain amount of time , like a year or two.
 

kidoggy

Veteran member
Apr 23, 2016
5,931
4,196
53
idaho
I have maintained my dislike of any point or preference system since they started. I believe random draw is really the only fair way to allocate tags if they are limited in the amount available for those who want them. I also believe in the premium draw areas that those who are successful should be not allowed to apply again for a certain amount of time , like a year or two.
that's how we do it in idaho . random draw and if you draw a buck or bull tag you must sit out a year before applying for one again. you can still put in for a doe or cow tag though , if you wish to.

some are lucky some are not . I am not . but still prefer the possibility of getting a good tag every year over the point systems . I wouldn't even waste my time and money on such!
there is a bull tag I have put in for ,for twenty years and never drawn. a least six ,friends and/or family members have drawn it twice and a couple three times in that period.

guess I art ta pray more! ;)
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
540
155
Buzz, for the most part I agree. But I simply don't like the preference point system. And it's not because of the cost of buying the points. It's because it makes it very difficult to draw a license, especially if you didn't get in on the ground floor. I would like to see all states get rid of preference points and go to the bonus point system or completely random draw. I posted this because I was amazed that Wyoming now makes more money on preference points than it does on selling elk licenses, or deer licenses, or antelope licenses or fishing licenses. If they need more money, raise license fees...don't create a monster.
The GF didn't create the monster...WYOGA and the legislature did.
 

kidoggy

Veteran member
Apr 23, 2016
5,931
4,196
53
idaho
in the end it is really simple.
I have no particular stakes in the game because I will never pay those crazy non resident prices .

wyoming has nothing I need because Idaho has everything I need!

for those unfortunate souls who do NEED wyoming.... they can only charge such BECAUSE of your needs!!!

don't want to pay????????? wean yourselves from their teets!!!!!!!!!!!
 

tim

Veteran member
Jun 4, 2011
2,025
493
north idaho
I wonder how much the pittman robertson act puts in to game agencies, especially with the increase in guns and ammo sales.
 

BKC

Very Active Member
Feb 15, 2012
740
54
The high plains of Colorado
I think, at least here in Colorado, that if the CO parks & wildlife would go to a preference point banking system, you would see the backlog of big point holders lessen and tags for most units get a little easier to draw. Some people will hold out for the big units but a lot of people will start spending their points. I think it would take 3 to 5 years to work itself out. It would be worth buying a point if you knew you had a chance at drawing a decent tag. I was one of those guys who got in on the ground floor and didn't worry about others. Now with kids and grand kids, I think that something has to be done to give everyone a fair chance. The shear numbers of hunters and tags available are the biggest stumbling point. It is never going to be perfect but it could get a lot better .