A preface to statements that follow: I live in a small Podunk “City” in east Tennessee. That doesn’t mean anything till you look where it is – right next to the Smoky Mountains – National Park, the most visited national park in the country. I spend 60-70-80 days or parts of days every year in the Smokys. I’m used to lots of visitors in my town, anywhere I go, hiking in the Smokys, fishing in streams/creeks, every where........

I have 2 issues with the WY, and MT, initiatives.
1. By raising the price of an elk tag another $300, and talk of making tags $2000 mentioned in this thread, a point will be reached where guys like me will say forget it. I’m not paying $2000 for an elk tag. I’ve swallowed hard and forked over $12/1300 for 2 WY NR “Special” elk tags in the past 5-6 years. The MT initiative is even worse. The MOGA wanted 60%, later revised to 39% (I think) of all tags to go to MOGA constituents. This is great business for MOGA and their clients. Basically, rich dudes get to hunt elk every year by going with an outfitter, the rest of us get the privilege to pull a tag once every 5 years or so. And we get to pay a higher fee for that privilege. My point: hunting out west is becoming a rich man’s sport. Joe Blue Collar won’t be hunting. A point for later reference – there are more Joe Blue Collar guys than rich dudes.
2. My second issue is related to the first – can the people proposing these issues see the divide it is creating? Each state can do what they wish in their state, and the people of that state can do as they wish with their wildlife. I got no issue with that. What wraps me around the axle is folks posing a self-centered view to further their own chances, experience, or whatever motivates them to vehemently support these initiatives.

I raise these two points to set up a 50,000 foot view of these issues. With hunter numbers declining, maybe not in your neighborhood/area/state, why do we want mechanisms to further limit our numbers? Secondly, I don’t see how a state can justify reducing the number of NR hunters in times of budget issues. Wyoming comes to mind here. I receive the “Cowboy State Daily” in my email box every day about 11 AM. I love WY, vacation there every year and will likely move there when I retire. In theory, I should shut up and seek self-interest because I plan to be a resident and I’ll have more tags to myself in 3-4-5 years.

Maybe not so coincidentally, here a link to one of the top story’s today: UW Analysis: Wyoming Could Lose $12.9B From Energy Moratorium. Economic math is a funny thing, and clearly related to statistics – I can make it say anything I want. Its not a secret that the new administration is going to develop policies and/or Regs that will hurt the economy of Wyoming. I’m very well aware of the coal situation in WY – down something like 10% in the past 2 years with a slew of legal issues surrounding several operators in the Power River Basin. It isn’t going to get better.

Back to my preface: in TN I enjoy a 0% state income tax. Likely not again so coincidentally, in the Cowboy today, I see one of WY legislators have proposed a 4% state income tax (I believe they have zero now). WY obviously has a budget issue, either now or on the horizon. I put up with the tourists (i.e. NR) in the Smokys, in every friggin’ town/city/village, on the rivers, steams in the Smokys trying to catch an 8 inch trout for one reason – they keep my property taxes low and state income taxes to 0. I have figured out areas to go with close to zero people, maybe a local or two. I guarantee it works the same way with residents in hunting spots. Why put a hit on your local and state economy because you want more tags to yourself, or MOGA in MT?

Next, if we price out people like me, and most other DIY guys, that leaves fewer hunters - recall there is more Joe Blue Collar, than rich dudes. I can't help but see hunter numbers declining. I think the current number is 5% of US residents over 16 are hunters. Do we really want to start putting up road blocks to new hunters?

At 57, I could foresee a future of no or very restricted hunting opportunities. Sounds like a situation we fled in the 1700’s………………

Last edited by bwinters; 03/05/21.
Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it.