30% Increase in Nonresident Hunters in Wyoming in one year

[dvolmer]

dvolmer,
 Ones ability to get a non-resident tag or a tag in their own state should not be based on the amount of money one has in their wallet.
One should not be able to go to the head of the line for a tag because they have more money than some one else.

I totally agree!!!  I don’t think anyone should be able to buy there way in. That’s why I totally disagree with Governors tags.  But if you are in the business to sell widgets, you are going to try to sell them for whatever price you can get. This is what these states are doing. They are not in the business to make non-residents happy with cheap prices and great deals. There stake holders (resident hunters, tax payers, and local in state businesses) want all the bang for the buck that they can get.  This keeps there resident licenses super cheap and non-resident hunters flipping the bill for there fish and wildlife management and supplying tons of local businesses revenue. Market pressure controls the price.  Who is going to spend all the excess money on motels, meals, and other things while hunting out of state?  The rich guy or the guy that can barely scrape up the bucks for the tag and gas who plans on eating sandwiches every day and sleeping in a tent???  There are a lot of people here in Washington that have given up and quit hunting because of the cost of resident hunting licenses here.  With all that said, it is sad to say that the extended hunting outlook in the 30 year future is bleak for the average guy and gal. Tags will continue to climb but access to quality hunting will become the bigger issue.  The fact of the matter that these states that go out of there way to recruit out of state hunters are in it for the money. It’s big big business in states that struggle with small populations and hardly any tax revenue.  Do I like it?  NO!  But it’s the world we are living in and I’m getting to the age that I’m in still pretty good shape but I can see a light at the end of the tunnel. To me it’s just trying to hunt as much as possible with the years I’ve got left.  But the long outlook in the future for hunters is not very good for many many reasons. Here in this liberal state hunting would have already been outlawed if it wasn’t for the large revenue it produces for our state that their greed overcomes their principles. I’m hoping for the best but it looks like a scary future. I’ve hunted for over 40 years in Washington and the changes of the last 10-15 years are scary.

[sjhgraysage]

d,
This is the statement that had me concerned:
"I wish they would go up until they were just high enough to insure that all applicants get a tag.  I'm 53 years old and would gladly pay more to make sure I drew every year. "

The only way to have only enough applicants for all the available tags with your scenario is to price a bunch of people out of the game.
There just isn't enough resource for everyone to get a license/tag every year, and with our current mule deer trends it will likely be worse.

Perhaps I just misunderstood your statement.

[Karl Blanchard]

"Me over others" ensures the death of hunting within my children's lifetime....

[jdmecomber]

Got a little more clarification on this 30% issue, the info was for a specific unit increase of 30% from nonresident hunters.  Where is the data guy at!!!!

[Antlershed]

Then it’s just a shift between units, but since you asked...

[idaho guy]

hunting fool must have highlighted another top elk unit! 

[jdmecomber]

Then it’s just a shift between units, but since you asked...

There it is!!!!!
Looks like a big increase is very possible in a unit.

Thanks for the data

[dvolmer]

Like I previously mentioned, those stats are extremely flawed due to the individuals buying points and not actually applying are like unsuccessful applicants that aren't being tallied in the report.  We are used to having to buy a license and apply to get our point here in Washington.  In Wyoming you can get a point without a license.  For example, If I purchased an elk point this last year and now have 8 points, it would be not to wise to apply for a hunt that requires 12 points to draw.  I don't have to tie up the license and tag fee until i get rejected (that's a lot of money too).  So my lack of putting in is not in the statistics but its still real and for those that have less points then me they will still have to wait until after me to get a license.

[dvolmer]

d,
This is the statement that had me concerned:
"I wish they would go up until they were just high enough to insure that all applicants get a tag.  I'm 53 years old and would gladly pay more to make sure I drew every year. "

The only way to have only enough applicants for all the available tags with your scenario is to price a bunch of people out of the game.
There just isn't enough resource for everyone to get a license/tag every year, and with our current mule deer trends it will likely be worse.

Perhaps I just misunderstood your statement.

I understand your concern.  I'm just simply stating, that if I had a choice of paying $350 for a Wyoming deer tag and my odds were to get one every third year, I would gladly pay $500 for a Wyoming deer tag if it would mean that I could go every year.  Lets just say that at age 53 I have 15 more years of hunting (physically speaking) I would rather go 15 times instead of 5.  I am a single income family with 7 children.  My last child is a senior in high school this year.  From youth until I roughly turned 40 or so I only hunted in Washington and pretty much was a weekend warrior.  I couldn't afford much more without impacting my family and any extended time away would get me the wrath of my better half.  At about 43 years old I started to hunt Montana.  At about 48 I started to hunt Wyoming.  I have never paid for a guided hunt or trespass fees.  In some ways I feel like I have put my time in and now that I am older I have a little bit more resources I can spend without affecting my families life style.  I truly am at the age where I can still keep up but I can also feel the creekiness in the bones after a hard days hunt and a sore back to go with it.  I don't know the answer.  Maybe Im selfish in my thoughts.  It does scare me that hunting in the future has a very poor outlook for the common man.  We don't need to get into that here.  We could have 10,000 posts on that and talk forever but anyone that has hunted for 10-50 years in the past can see where that is all going. 

But if you were a state that offered 17,000 out of state tags at lets just say $500 each and you had 25,000 people applying, any business minded politician would try to come up with a model where 18,000 people are putting in for the 17,000 tags instead of 25,000 and you could sell them for $750 each.  Remember, we are talking out of state non-residents here.  Your constituents (voting public) will love you for it because it brings in all this extra revenue that they dont have to pay and have tax increases.  Their licenses can even go down (you would be amazed at how cheap Wyoming and Montana resident licenses are compared to us here in Washington).  Its a win win for the state, politicians, the in-state hunters, and the states general public & businesses.  Remember, they could care less about you as long as you pay the license fee and bring your out of state money with you when you come!  As non-residents we are at their mercy you might say for better words.  I guess the real answer is to move to Wyoming or Montana but I know that isnt close to realistic for most of us here.

[Antlershed]

d,
This is the statement that had me concerned:
"I wish they would go up until they were just high enough to insure that all applicants get a tag.  I'm 53 years old and would gladly pay more to make sure I drew every year. "

The only way to have only enough applicants for all the available tags with your scenario is to price a bunch of people out of the game.
There just isn't enough resource for everyone to get a license/tag every year, and with our current mule deer trends it will likely be worse.

Perhaps I just misunderstood your statement.

I understand your concern.  I'm just simply stating, that if I had a choice of paying $350 for a Wyoming deer tag and my odds were to get one every third year, I would gladly pay $500 for a Wyoming deer tag if it would mean that I could go every year.  Lets just say that at age 53 I have 15 more years of hunting (physically speaking) I would rather go 15 times instead of 5.  I am a single income family with 7 children.  My last child is a senior in high school this year.  From youth until I roughly turned 40 or so I only hunted in Washington and pretty much was a weekend warrior.  I couldn't afford much more without impacting my family and any extended time away would get me the wrath of my better half.  At about 43 years old I started to hunt Montana.  At about 48 I started to hunt Wyoming.  I have never paid for a guided hunt or trespass fees.  In some ways I feel like I have put my time in and now that I am older I have a little bit more resources I can spend without affecting my families life style.  I truly am at the age where I can still keep up but I can also feel the creekiness in the bones after a hard days hunt and a sore back to go with it.  I don't know the answer.  Maybe Im selfish in my thoughts.  It does scare me that hunting in the future has a very poor outlook for the common man.  We don't need to get into that here.  We could have 10,000 posts on that and talk forever but anyone that has hunted for 10-50 years in the past can see where that is all going. 

But if you were a state that offered 17,000 out of state tags at lets just say $500 each and you had 25,000 people applying, any business minded politician would try to come up with a model where 18,000 people are putting in for the 17,000 tags instead of 25,000 and you could sell them for $750 each.  Remember, we are talking out of state non-residents here.  Your constituents (voting public) will love you for it because it brings in all this extra revenue that they dont have to pay and have tax increases.  Their licenses can even go down (you would be amazed at how cheap Wyoming and Montana resident licenses are compared to us here in Washington).  Its a win win for the state, politicians, the in-state hunters, and the states general public & businesses.  Remember, they could care less about you as long as you pay the license fee and bring your out of state money with you when you come!  As non-residents we are at their mercy you might say for better words.  I guess the real answer is to move to Wyoming or Montana but I know that isnt close to realistic for most of us here.

The problem is you openly supported that type of thinking in your earlier post. As guys get priced out, they quit hunting. When they quit hunting, I bet a lot of them stop supporting hunting. Even if one of them stops supporting hunting, that’s a problem.   

[Antlershed]

And I realize that the original data does not include the guys that are sitting on the sideline waiting until they have enough points. That wasn’t the original question though. It was whether or not there are 30% more people applying for tags.

[jdmecomber]

And I realize that the original data does not include the guys that are sitting on the sideline waiting until they have enough points. That wasn’t the original question though. It was whether or not there are 30% more people applying for tags.

Thanks for all the data Brent, it helped clear up a lot of things.

I have been building points for all species in Wyoming.  Fun stuff