Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    462
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 56 Times in 46 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Umpqua Hunter View Post
    Yeppers TG…to further that thought, if a state simply gave you a point each year you applied for a tag and didn't get it, that would be one thing. However, when a state charges a significant fee, for a "point only" option, that offering implies that those points have future value and you are building preference for future year's draws. As you said, if tag numbers were substantially reduced, I would certainly want to receive a refund for points purchased for my wife, my children and I.
    A refund from the Wyoming G&F?? You can wish in one hand, well; you know the rest. It's doubtful that anyone would get a refund.
    Now, you have to have either one foot, or both in the grave to get a refund.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Allegan, MI
    Posts
    869
    Thanks
    34
    Thanked 190 Times in 159 Posts
    Congratulations
    1
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by shootbrownelk View Post
    A refund from the Wyoming G&F?? You can wish in one hand, well; you know the rest. It's doubtful that anyone would get a refund.
    Now, you have to have either one foot, or both in the grave to get a refund.

    ***My guess is that a class action lawsuit could and probably would be filed if they proceed with a 10% cap and nothing is done for all the people that have money invested in a system that shouldn't be changed unless a person can opt out and be made whole.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    262
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 43 Times in 40 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    [***My guess is that a class action lawsuit could and probably would be filed if they proceed with a 10% cap and nothing is done for all the people that have money invested in a system that shouldn't be changed unless a person can opt out and be made whole.[/QUOTE]

    Surely they would do something, a state like WY has a political reputation to uphold, which includes standing for the people and not taxing them (or tacking hard earned money). Hence they would have to raise taxes to compensate the NR loss of $$, either by a resident tag increase or some other form of tax. Their political platform is based on sustaining for itself, which charging a NR hunter to use its natural resource is an excellent income without taxing the stake holders (residents). Everything in WY benefits by their current method, so the method is not broke its the money spending that is out of control.

    If WY does this it will mean one of two things; 1.) the wildlife are in bad shape and desperate measures need to be taken or 2.) politics have shifted and natural resource management in WY has been pushed aside by politics and not science

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    colfax, wa
    Posts
    4,675
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 535 Times in 468 Posts
    Congratulations
    5
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Cut the NR tags in 1/2 and double all the NR prices. Atleast 1/2 of them should have enough money to pay that price and the state will make just as much or more money and have more tags for residents at the same time.

    I really hope that dont happen but its about how I feel as a NR alot of times...

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    364
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 105 Times in 76 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Buzz had a good idea, take those 10% NR tags and sell them to residents for the NR Special and Regular fee.
    We'll see how quickly the residents are willing to "pay more to make up the difference".

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    St. Charles, IL
    Posts
    379
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The writing has been on the wall for years in Wyoming, and almost all other states for even longer. This bill would be no surprise at all. I've come to expect bait & switching nonresident point values, and always warn newbies of it when they jump in the point games. States feel no responsibility to maintain the value of what they peddle. So for Wyoming I began planning years ago, dumping my 8 sheep points back when they jacked the nonrefundable rate to $100/year. That was a mathematical deal breaker. Then I quickly cashed in my moose points as soon as I could draw anything average, and afterwards quit that game. Then last year burned my max elk & lope points. So all I got left is deer points in WY. This bill proposal just pushed me over the edge for those poor value points to begin with, so I'm now all in to burn them this year. Was thinking of it anyway. Not worth waiting 10 years for a 170" buck. So my closet will be bare by the time they try to devalue what I have left! I beat them to the punch!

    I have no problem with states deciding what they want for NR quotas. It's the part about devaluing previously sold points that I feel is unethical. In my 20 years of applying in 14 states, only two did not devalue the points they sold me............Arizona & New Hampshire. That's it.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    116
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 22 Times in 14 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Let's not forget Montana, they increased the value of my NR points by squaring them.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    262
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 43 Times in 40 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Whatever WY does I hope they do it for the benefit of the wildlife. As a NR I am willing to pay whatever I can afford, it may cut my trips back significantly and I will likely not spend much money while Im out there.

    I am willing to pay for the wildlife, not some bureaucrat and his failed agenda. Of course, in return for paying a significantly higher priced tag I would expect the quality overall to improve with the years.

    As a resident of my home state, I would be willing to pay a lot more as well if we needed it. I would easily double my license fee to improve existing WMA's and acquire more access. We pay $130 for an all inclusive hunting and fishing license, it includes up to 4 spring turkeys, a few fall turkey, 3 buck deer, basically unlimited doe, small game, and fishing. I think our turkey quotas are too high, but other than that it is a very fair price and I am willing to pay more if the wildlife would benefit from it.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Leftover Licenses
    By Colorado Cowboy in forum Colorado
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-06-2013, 09:06 AM
  2. Trophy Game Draw Results
    By Stig87 in forum Wyoming
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 05-16-2013, 07:12 PM
  3. High Cost Licenses or High Availability Licenses?
    By Edelweiss in forum General Hunting
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-26-2012, 05:47 PM
  4. Are licenses in the mail?
    By schlaggerman in forum Wyoming
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-26-2012, 04:15 PM
  5. Point Structure and Youth Licenses
    By MOHunter in forum Wyoming
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-09-2011, 04:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •