For website - Public Input for November 18th, 2021 Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce Meeting

	A	B	C	D	E	F
1	The Taskforce is considering recommending that preference points for moose and bighorn sheep be converted to weighted bonus points. What would you like the Taskforce to know about this idea?	The Taskforce is considering recommending the addition of type 9 (archery only) licenses for the Big 5 species (bighorn sheep, mountain goat, moose, wild bison, grizzly bear). What would you like the Taskforce to know about this idea?	The Taskforce discussed at their September meeting multiple ideas related to increasing resident hunter opportunities for elk, deer and antelope. What would you like the members to know about this topic? The meeting video can be viewed at www.wyomingwildlifetaskforce.com if you would like to follow their discussion.	The Taskforce discussed at their September meeting multiple ideas related to landowner matters. What would you like the members to know about this topic? The meeting video can be viewed at www.wyomingwildlifetaskforce.com if you would like to follow their discussion.	What topics would you like the Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce to address?	What other information would you like to provide to the taskforce?
2		This is an excellent idea to spread out hunting pressure and tag allocation. Wyoming should consider specific weapon only tags for all species to spread pressure and tag allocation while still allowing the same amount of opportunity.	The best way to increase opportunity is to start discussing traditional muzzleloader seasons or traditional muzzleloader only tags. CO, UT, SD, MT all have ample opportunity for muzzleloader only tags and seasons while Wyoming is limited at best. To create these types of licenses would spread hunting pressure from regular general season hunts while allowing the same amount or increased opportunity while creating a hunt that has a decreased success rate with percussion cap or flintlock non scoped weapons. It would garner huge interest in the state, increase opportunity, decrease efficacy leaving the herds less pressured and would certainly increase hunter satisfaction by spreading out hunters during different season dates. By implementing additional fees such as the archery permit it would even generate additional revenue for Game and Fish and wildlife conservation.		Wyoming should consider a sage grouse stamp. People from all over the country come to Wyoming to hunt sage grouse yet managers really don't know the true amount of pressure on the birds. People who buy a game bird license could be hunting migratory birds to forest grouse without ever actually hunt sage grouse. To mandate a sage grouse stamp or permit the game and fish would know the exact number of people specifically hunting sage grouse and not have to rely on questionnaires that aren't filled out and sent back reliably. It would also add revenue for sage grouse research and conservation. It worked wonders for duck stamp, I believe a grouse stamp would fall in line with those results
3	Stop issuing preference points and freeze current point holders. You are changing the rules of the game years after it started with a promise of preference points eventually drawing a license. Keep the current resident allocation of 75% to highest point holders, the remaining 25% keep totally random. Years down the road when there are not enough high point holders in the first draw the licenses will go into the random draw. The Game & Fish should not have made promises they cannot honor. Yes it is unfortunate not to be a high point holder but make it once in a lifetime hunt and let the system take forever to work through the point holders the Game & Fish created. There is still a random chance for everyone, do not start another points system.	No to type 9 licenses. A license holder can already choose whether or not to hunt archery. Adding type 9 licenses would take from the existing quota and lowers the chance and time period for a point holder who has been waiting to rifle hunt. Don't force people to choose archery or rifle.	Every state other than Wyoming is already 90/10 or less. Wyoming is way too generous with non-resident big game hunting licenses. Every year thousands of resident hunt opportunities are lost forever. As a native and lifelong resident, I have not drawn a type 1 limited quota elk tag in the 35 years of applying, since the age of 14. I would appreciate any increase in chance to draw the license before I die. Currently, non-residents are on a points system guaranteeing them a license, possibly more than one, rather than the 35 years I have waited. And no, I don't want a resident point system. Fair allocations on par with the other 90/10 states, random draw odds and waiting periods are the possible solution to resident issues. Residents are your constituents, non-residents are not to be part of the legislative representation to which you are making these task force recommendations. The revenue loss was addressed in Senator Hicks 2021 Bill Senate File 103. It was supported by Director Nesvik and the Game & Fish and the bill would have added an 8 million dollar revenue increase to their budget. The revenue loss is overstated by opponents. Director Nesvik testified during Senate File 103 and I quote "64% of TOTAL Revenue come from all licenses sales, of that 64%, 77% comes from non-resident license sales." This equates to 49.28% of the TOTAL revenue to the Game & Fish. That is less than half and should not be inflated to the fictitious figures presented by The Wyoming Guides and Outfitters Association or their lobbyists. Special interests are motivated to fight for their guaranteed profits and not willing to face reality of not having the state provide them a system of outfitter welfare.	No to transferable landowner tags. Recommend legislation to fix the abuse of landowner tag allocations. Change the acreage requirement to 640 acres or more. Stop issuing bull elk and buck deer licenses to landowners, instead issue cow/calf or doe/fawn tags to control the population which in turn should alleviate the landowner claims of damage. Great testimony was provided during the September meeting by Wyatt. He clearly debated the use of grazing on public land and made several great points of the system and the lack of appreciation the private landowners have for the use of public land for grazing private stock. I think landowners need to be rewarded or incentivized with bull or buck tags for providing great habitat and public access. If damage claims are still high issue depredation tags specifically to control populations when needed.	Reform Commissioner's Licenses. ALL the proceeds should go to the Wyoming Game & Fish general budget from the sale of these licenses. The Game & Fish could then award grants to wildlife or conservation groups with the majority vote of the entire Game & Fish Commission. This system of checks and balances is needed to prevent the current misuse of these revenue generating licenses. These licenses are being abused by organizations and nonprofits for non-wildlife benefits and sometimes non-qualifying nonprofits claims to be a 501c3. Some examples of abuse/over issuance, The Muley Fanatics Foundation and The Wyoming Guides and Outfitters Association (WYOGA). Muley Fanatics are issued multiple licenses each year and possibly using the funds for salaries or administration. WYOGA has received several licenses over the years and is not a nonprofit organization as outlined by State Statute to qualify as a recipient of Commissioner's Licenses. Senator Hicks questioned such abuses in the issuance of Commissioner's Licenses at the September meeting. The task force needs to recommend changes to the legislature to amend the issuance of Commissioner's Licenses.	Please consider reforming poach penalties to reflect the value of trophy and big game licenses. Poaching need to be a felony and firearms privileges need to evaluated.
4	Leave the system as is, stop issuing new preference points.	No to type 9 licenses for all species. You can already hunt archery on every license.	Fully support 90/10 and willing to pay more as a resident hunter to fund G&F. Wyoming is giving away hunting opportunities every year and many residents never draw any licenses for years.	No to transferable landowner licenses. Change landowner licenses to cow calf and doe fawn. Increase the acreage to a full section to qualify for landowner licenses.	Commissioner's Licenses money should all go to the Game & Fish for wildlife conservation. Too many being misused and abused.	Thank you to all of you for sacrificing your time to serve on this task force. This task force's recommendations will affect hunting for the foreseeable future. Please keep the Wyoming resident in mind, the minority. In comparison, the army of non-resident hunters being email alerted to comment from huge hunt forums like GoHunt and Eastman's Tag Hub. Non-residents dollars are short lived and temporary. They are not consuming and paying taxes in Wyoming year round. Please don't be influenced by the high dollar lobbyists of the Wyoming Outfitters and the Wyoming Stock Growers spewing their scare tactics of dire economic impacts. Remember they paid for the studies and are skewed their way. The reason this task force was created by the governor was the pressure from lobbyists to stall the yearly legislation being proposed to change license allocations to 90/10 on big game licenses. All of the other issues being discussed are intended to complicate and muddy the waters to stop 90/10 on big game. Please see through the complicated maze of topics. Support Wyoming's residents and recommend 90/10 on the remaining big game licenses.
5	No to all preference and bonus points.	Residents can already choose to hunt archery on current licenses with a longer season. So no to type 9 licenses.	Wyoming should not be allocating more licenses than all the other western states. Please recommend 90/10 to the legislature and increase licenses fee on all hunters to make sure the Wyoming G&F is fully funded.	Land owners use the public lands at a very cheap rate to graze their livestock. I thing they are taking advantage of the system and the G&F. I do not think there should be any reason to allow transferable landowner tags to start monetizing hunting more than the commissioner''s tags have already accomplished. The land owners are already compensated for their damages and should only receive cow and doe licenses to lower the population damaging their crops. If they want bull or buck tags they need to allow more public access and easements to landlocked public lands.	Abuse of commissioner's tags, needs reforms. Poaching laws are too weak. Fund more water projects in arid areas with donations from hunters.	Thank you for allowing me to comment and thank you for serving on the task force.
6	I don't apply for the big five and have no opinion. I have harvested my one moose and that's my once in a lifetime and good for me. Everyone else should think this way.	Archery hunters wound more animals than any other weapon. So no to type 9 tags.	Wyoming should be 90/10 on all licenses including big game. Time to pay more as residents and stop selling our opportunity to hunt to non residents.	Landowner tags should not be transferable. Land should not be subdivided to achieve a landowner licenses like the law already states. Please recommend changes to the legislature to increase the amount of land that qualifies for licenses. Stop issuing bull and buck tags to landowners. They do not lower populations, issue cow and doe tags and watch how many landowner tags go unclaimed. Then offer depredation tags to lower the number of wildlife and see if the landowners are willing to provide public access to hunt. It may show which landowners are truly interested in working with the G&F instead of collecting money each year.	Multiple commissioners tags are going to the same organizations every year, some going to organizations that have nothing to do with wildlife. If an animal is being killed for money, the proceeds should go back to the G&F for wildlife management and conservation. The proceeds could also be used to fund the regular G&F budget.	I appreciate all of you serving on the task force, thank you for your time.
7	People who currently hold a significant number of preference points for a species need to be grandfathered for the system to continue for them until they draw. I would suggest those holding roughly half the number of points required to draw any given species be grandfathered. I still oppose this idea in any event. Just make the big 5 a once in a lifetime opportunity and if supply ever exceeds demand then there could be a leftover draw open to anyone eligible.	I think this is more needed for elk and deer than the big 5 species. I oppose.	There should be a 90/10 resident/non-resident split for all all species of big game including deer and elk, perhaps antelope too. I am willing to pay more for a license to eliminate the non residents eating up such a huge percentage of licenses. It is not fair to resident hunters.	Landowner tags should be valid only on land deeded to the license holder or a member of his or her immediate family. In that instance I am fine with the landowner getting preference for limited quota permits but not to hunt with the landowner tag on public land. Additionally the damage compensation fund needs to come out of the state general fund instead of hunting license fees as is presently the case. The game and fish is underfunded and hunters who do not want grizzly bears around any more than the livestock owners who suffer depredation should not be footing the bill for these kills. I believe compensation is warranted but quit using license fees to pay for it. Our dollars paid as hunters need to go back into trying to bring back our game herds. We have lost a lot regarding hunting quality in this state in the last 30 years. The current state of affairs is pathetic actually regarding the decline in our big game numbers acrossball species	We need to eliminate governor's tags and all other donated tags. By the time these allocations along with landowner tags and non resident allocations are mixed into the drawing pot residents are losing a hell of a lot of opportunities they should not be.	We have to accept at some point that wildlife is an important renewable resource vital to the future of Wyoming's economy and deserves equal footing along with other important drivers of our economy. It is probably our most important sustainable resource, if we can reverse the depopulation trend. We as a state have consistently and conveniently ignored the importance of flourishing game herds, which until fairly recent times essentially took care of itself. It is time to put politics aside and do whatever needs to be done to bring back our once thriving herds. Thank you for your service in this important committee. Mike Crosson
8	I would be in favor of weighted bonus points and once in a life time tag...	yes	90/10 resident nonresident tag split... Type 9 tag for all LQ areas...	No transferable land owner tags and no sit aside outfitter tags none...	90/10 split for elk deer and antelope...	no transferable landowner tags and no sit aside outfitter tags...
9	I am against it. Taking a Preference point system away form the high point holders at this point is simply wrong. Put 75% of the tags from the 10% set aside in a Preference point draw 25% in a random draw. There is natural break at the 22 point level where these point holders will be gone in ten years. Determine a duration, for instance 5, 10 years etc.. Everyone will know the rules and can adapt their application strategy accordingly. Then dissolve the system. The preference point system needs to go away. Replacing it with a Weighted system is a shell game. Not having a point system should be your long term goal.
10						Landowner tags should be just that landowner tags for there own land. It is a bunch of crap that they can hunt anywhere in the area with a landowner tag!!
11		Why? If a person draws a Big 5 tag now he/she can simply pursue the animal with a variety of weapons including a bow. It a needless addition.	You have already made the decision to go to the 90/10 Resident to Non resident permit allocation for the Big 5. I am anticipating you doing the same for deer, elk and pronghorn. Because of this my wife plans to let her deer preference points expire. She will not contributing to your department in the future. It’s obvious the Wy G and F dept needs her support as we are receiving correspondence by email and mail to make sure she buys her points so she doesn’t forget. Interesting.
12	No comment	No comment	No comment	Ability for landowners to reallocate their landowner tags. Currently we have had antelope hunters come from Idaho, Utah and other areas for a number of years on 108 antelope having limited success drawing. Trespass fees not requested or accepted. For a number of years the these landowner tags have gone unused. These hunters have asked about using the landowner tags for even the doe/fawns. Landowners provide year around feed and shelter and in my opinion exceeds the value paid to the landowner for the harvest tag. Also two or three years ago we worked with Hunting with Heroes for two antelope and elk tags - great hunt with very deserving former service members. Request your consideration to allow these tags to be donated to service members, etc. going forward excepting out the cost of the license. In our case we went through the process of getting and paying for the landowner tags to donate back. Would seem landowner - Wyoming Game & Fish collaboration to provide the tag(s), access and license would be an appropriate 'thank you' to those so deserving.	No comment	No comment
13	No comment	No comment	No comment	We provide checkerboard access including deeded land, year around feed which then should result in landowners being able to allocate their landowner tags as they see appropriate for the management of their private land. We have provided landowner tags to Hunting with Heroes before to past service member that were hurt while serving, it was a way to show our appreciation to them. With this we ask if Wyoming Game and Fish could come together for these service members and donate these tags without the cost of the license if a landowner goes that route with their landowner tags.	No comment	No comment
14		I think Type 9 tags should be considered for all limited quota Big Game. Also consider a statewide type 9 tag for general areas - Choose your weapon in general license areas, but still have the ability to hunt areas statewide open to general license.			Crossover archery/rifle seasons on public land. Rifle seasons should be limited to private land only during the early archery season... This would allow for controlled access and safer conditions in the field.
15	Weighted points would be okay... Make it once in a life time tag	Type 9 archery would be okay... It would be also a once in a life time tag..	90/10 tag split for elk deer and antelope a mandatory waiting to draw after any resident draw a antlered licenses....	No transferable landowner tags and no sit aside outfitter tags....	90/10 elk deer and antelope
16		I support this idea as long as the rifle license holder can't additionally hunt the archery season.		In light of the recent changes in Montana, I'm absolutely convinced that transferable landowner licenses are a bad idea. It will lead to a quid pro quo license system that would violate at least two of the tenants of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. I have been thinking quite a lot about different options for changes to the landowner tag system. To start, I don't think the current system is completely broken, but some tweaks would certainly help the equitable distribution of quota for the public resource. The task force briefly mentioned the idea of making landowner tags valid for only their own land. I liked this idea a lot at first, but the more I think about it the more I think it violates the principles of public lands and public resources. I think the alternative may lie in how best the quota system can help the agency manage the resources. The job completion reports contain the management strategy for each unit. So let's use 'private land' in elk area 2 as an example. I would interpret that strategy to mean that the landowners in the unit largely feel that there are too many elk in the unit and would prefer to have fewer individuals in the herd so there will be less grazing competition for their livestock. The method to accomplish this goal would be to remove more cow elk. Therefore, it would make more sense for landowner tags to only be valid for cows in this example. The landowners stand the best chance of achieving high success rates and helping the agency achieve the goal that the landowners themselves are driving. In this system there should be no landowner tags available for units that have 'special' or 'recreational' management strategies as, in my opinion, landowners should be on equal footing with the general public. Licenses shouldn't be provided as quid pro quo for wildlife being present on their property. They can certainly apply for and receive licenses like everyone else, but shouldn't get a guaranteed tag for one of these types of management strategies. I say all of this and will add that the job completion reports don't provide any details on what the various management strategies mean. I think it would be worthwhile for the WGFD to educate the task force and those of us who are watching your meetings on not only this subject, but also more broadly how the JCRs factor into how they carry out their work.	I think it would be a good idea to change the definition for lions, wolves, and bears from "Trophy Game" to "Large Carnivore". The general public largely supports legitimate hunting practices. All legal hunting in Wyoming is legitimate. However, introducing the term "trophy" into the conversation divides public support for wildlife regulation. Removing this emotionally charged term would help with this distraction to our State's wildlife management laws, regulations, and practices.
17				I would like to make two suggestions on the use of landowner licenses that would reward landowners for their efforts to manage the wildlife on their private lands. First, landowners would receive a set number of licenses based on total acres owned up to a certain limit. These licenses would include deer, antelope and elk. There would be no stipulations on who can use these licenses. Secondly, landowners would be able to request and purchase licenses from WGFD to use for hunters on their land. As a landowner, it is very frustrating to plan on hunters coming and hunting more than one species and only have them able to draw for one or none. I would like to have the ability to determine who hunts on my property.
18	Leave it as a straight point system like it is, weighted points won't create more opportunity more tags and less applicants does.	There should be type 9 licences for every species in every area this creates more opportunity, not sure why this isn't already in place.	It should be a 90/10 split for all species also Residents should have some type of preference system its not the 60's anymore there are several areas some Residents will never get to hunt in their lifetime now without some kind of preference system many area slowly decreasing in draw odds every year and it won't get any better in the future	I believe if landowner tags are made transferable they should only be allowed to be used on the land they were issued for not unit wide	They are all being addressed thank you all	None
19	Don't know enough to comment	Yes!	Sounds good	Perhaps we could develop something along the lines of a "Master Hunter" program to make more land owners feel comfortable letting hunters on their property.	Grizzly overpopulation. Too many close calls and maulings. How can we take back control and get bears to become more naturally concerned about human contact? Isn't there something we or the Governor can do? It makes no sense that bureaucrates in DC, who have no skin in the game, can dictate what WY does with it's wildlife.
20	No, just keep the PP system as is and give more tags to residents. Every state that has tried weighted or cubed PP has not made their residents happy with the outcome, licenses will not be easier to draw under weighted PP.	No, as resident we do not want pick your weapon, we want to opportunity to hunt archery and rifle. If forced to choose then archery participation will go down and we need to encourage more archery hunting not less. Most of us as residents also hunt for the meat , food, it provides as such we mainly use the most efficient method of harvest and that is rifle but we also enjoy the archery hunting aspect and get out to do that as well with much lower success rates. How will forcing resident to choose weapons affect a lifetime archery permit that was bought? You would be pulling the rug out form under those that bought the lifetime archery license that could not use it forced to choose the most effective methos of harvest for a very hard tag to draw.	No PP for resident deer, elk or antelope. Just give resident a bigger piece of the tag allocation pie. Quit rolling under applied for licenses onto the NR draw, put them back into a resident leftover draw before the NR leftover draw.	Absolutely no transferrable landowner tags, if anything make more Private Land Only licenses available in some areas. They already get 1st draw for licenses, do not give them landowner transferrable licenses. Also no more than the 2 max licenses for landowners on their land.	Remove the wilderness law that restricts NR to hunt only with a guide in wilderness areas, it is just a dumb law made in favor of outfitters. Safety is not the issue with them, just having outfitters in wilderness areas is their goal.	Many state employees have no guarantee of wages and job security but yet it seems the state wants to guarantee outfitters a wage by way of set aside licenses, no fair at all to the other state employees. Quit kowtowing to the outfitters association, it is a slap in the face to us regular residents who are not outfitters.
21	I absolutely support this move. True preference point systems leave only one outcome. The hunter will eventually have to outlive all other hunters to draw. This mean that as time goes on the only people able to draw the tags are going to be too old to fully hunt. It also sucks knowing that our children will have no chance of drawing these hunts until their parents are too old to enjoy the hunt with them. I would fully support a random draw over all options, but the bonus point system is a good compromise.	Absolutely not in favor of this under current recommendations. This would be a horrible idea especially given the new recommendations that the tags are Once in a lifetime. The way I understand the new suggestion is the tags are once in a lifetime, not the kill. If the licenses are a once in a lifetime kill and not a draw then maybe explore this, however I much prefer that all tags stay type 1 and people have the option to try and archery hunt. We do not need or want any reason to start pitting groups of hunters against each other. DO not make special carve outs for any group. Keep us all as hunters. No archery vs, muzzy, vs rifle, etc.	At the very least make all draw tags 80/20. 80 percent resident and 20% nonresident. Also all tags in the draw stay in that split and any left over can go on sale to all. 90/10 would be even better. Also get rid of the One Shot Hunts. There should be no carve outs for any special interest groups. 80 tags in the top units around my house is not acceptable. It is also not acceptable that the resource is being pimped out for the benefit of a few.	I am absolutely opposed to transferable land owner tags. Simply put such tags will create major issues with access etc. The current access programs in WY will be gone if we have transferable tags. The HMA areas will close, big money will be had and that will lead to closing of not only private lands but many public lands in the state. It would end our ability to have access programs as money and profits would be placed ahead of the resource and access. On the flip side we should put all our effort into expanding the HMA and access programs. For the land owners willing to participate in the programs we should be dumping all sorts of resources to them. Between weed mitigation, fencing, and straight up money. We could create a superfund for enrolled properties and make the enrollment into the programs worth the cost. The only way to maintain or increase our HMA/Walk IN programs will be avoiding the creation of transferable tags.	Elimination of the One Shot, Elimination of Raffle and Auction Tags that do not provide funds back to conservation, Removal of Feral Invasive Species like Horses, Stronger Incentives for landowners to participate in HMA/Walk-in programs,
22	This is a bad idea. We the public purchased preference points because that is what we wanted. We do not want bonus points. Bonus points don't work well. We would prefer no point system over a bonus point system. As a nonresident doing a cost benefit, the bonus point just does not have the value of a preference point. I am not willing to pay for it. And the money I have already spent will be greatly devalued.	This is a another bad idea. Splitting tags among weapon choice does not create more opportunities. (Same number of tags) It splits hunters into different groups. Bad idea.	I have heard Wyoming is the only western state that offers a 80/20 or better system. Incorrect. I point out Washington offers an a nonresident 100 percent draw opportunity for all species. Going to a 90/10 split will turn nonresident hunts from a 3 to 5 year experience to a 6 to 10 year experience without much of an increase in resident draw success. It will greatly devalue any point system. Not worth the cost of 6 to 10 points to travel to Wyoming.	Allowing landowners to sell a public resource is not good for the citizens of Wyoming. It will also very much limit young hunters, as the cost of tags be high. It will turn hunting Wyoming into only a RICH MANS sport.	I would like the taskforce to come with ideas on how to increase big game heard numbers. Witch would allow more tags to be issued. More animals = more tags, is the best answer. The hunt public will pay/donate $ to make this happen.
23	I fully support converting to a weighted bonus point system as point creep has put these tags out of reach for young to middle age hunters.	I do not support adding archery only to the big 5 species.	I strongly believe that resident hunting opportunities are already incredible in Wyoming and the envy of every other western state. I believe Wyoming should maintain the current resident opportunities as is and focus on best management of the elk, deer, and antelope herd to increase opportunity. Better management and conservation is the best approach to creating better and more hunting opportunities for resident and non-resident hunters, not change tag allocations.	Partnership and cooperation with private landowners is critical making greater hunting opportunities.	Please address the Wyoming wilderness restriction for non-resident hunters. This law makes no sense and is utterly laughable. It is unjustifiable.	I am grateful for opportunities Wyoming provides for big game hunting and I hope you carefully consider any changes to tag allocations.
24	I think it's a good idea as long as it's not like the Colorado moose, sheep, and mtn goat pref pt system where extra points are pretty much meaningless. Something similar to NV's bonus where pts are cubed or squared would offer those that have applied more years a little better chance to draw highly limited tags.	I think it would be a great idea to offer type 9 tags. It likely would allow more opportunity to hunt these high demand species with possibly lower success rates so more tags may be offered to the public.	I believe residents already have the opportunity to draw multiple tags for multiple big game species with good to excellent draw odds. Wyo res also have the opportunity to hunt general elk and deer units every year that aren't available to nonres. With 90/10 nonres high demand limited tags would be cut in 1/2 and take twice as long to draw. The few tags that would be gained by Wyo residents would only slightly increase their draw odds while impacting ALL nonresidents. Wyoming would loose revenue to the WG&F if limited tags become more difficult to draw and nonresidents would drop out of the preference point draw system. Nonresidents support a large chunk of the WG&F license and pref fee budget. Small town communities would also lose major revenue from nonresidents.	I am totally against landowner, outfitter, or any set aside tags. This has only created major problems in other states. These tags are taken directly away from public hunters.	Create more habitat improvement projects to improve water, browse, and wildlife. Wyoming's mule deer and antelope numbers have steadily been declining. Figure out strategies to improve habitat, predator/disease control, etc.	Hopefully Wyoming steers clear of taking limited tags from the public draw and offering these tags to landowners, outfitters, and special interest groups.
25	I watched the task force meeting on-line. The audio is not the best but I could understand some of the conversations. 1) I think the task force needs to make it clear why they are wanting to change the current system. 2) The task force need to show a statistical analysis for each possible iteration that is being proposed. Not just, "well, I think a bonus point system is better", or "I think a weighted bonus point system is better". What are the ramifications for each proposal. 3) I heard discussion for an interim hybrid (bonus & pref pt) system. Sounds like a nightmare for the G&F to implement. 4) Is the task force going to implement a comparable system for the non-resident (elk, deer, antelope). If not, what is the rationale for a different system? And at what cost to the G&F?	Gee, archery for grizzly bear? Forrest, whatever could go wrong with that idea? I saw a spike elk this year with an arrow sticking out the side of his face. I wouldn't want to meet a griz with the same problem. I would bet if the task force runs a stat analysis for mtn goat, a bonus point system will essentially do nothing for the odds given the paucity of tags.	Give residents greater preference over the premium elk tags (e.g.. NW Wy migration tags). If only a handful (less than 10?) tags are given out , they should all go to residents.	I am against the transfer of bull/buck tags to landowners. I'm OK with an allotment of cow/doe tags. The whole landowner system has to be re-visited. Too many large ranches are breaking into parcels to play the system. Also, if landowners are not allowing moderate access to their lands for hunting, they should not be given depredation payments.
26	I would prefer that the points stay as preference points.	I do not support type 9 tags for the big 5.	I believe that Wyoming residents should get a larger allocation of all species. I support 90/10 for all the big game species. I also think residents should get first chance at all leftover tags. Even a 24 hour period for residents only, then open it up to everybody would be great. I am also willing to pay more for my resident tags. I support the wilderness rule that non residents must hunt with a guide in wilderness areas.
27	Since we are so far into points both res/nonres that would be a good option I believe!	I think that would be a great option for all species !	After thinking about this for sometime, still not in favor of point systems and I’ve came to conclusion that a waiting period would not be a good thing.	Definitely not in favor of any kind of transferable landowner tags! Also I think maybe up the number of acres needed to qualify for landowner tags or just have them have to apply with everyone and do away with them!	Keep on with 90/10 on big 5 for sure and that would be good even for deer, elk and antelope.	Give residents 1st chance at leftover tags, then go to nonresident with what’s left!
28			I feel the current Quatos should be left in place. 90/10 split is unreasonable and will impact local communities if implemented.
29	If the nonresident quota percentage goes down then I believe this is a fair solution. If the NR quota stays the same then preference points need to stay the same. Alot of us have put alot of money in the system and it's not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game	Great idea I'd apply
30		I don't think Archery only permits for the Big 5 are in the best interests of hunters. Most, if not all of these permits and species, can be hunted with Archery equipment on a regular tag. All this would do is take a group of hunters, people who don't archery hunt for whatever reason, and eliminate them from a certain amount of tags. Keep the Big 5 tags as any legal weapon.	I would like the distribution of Deer, Elk and Pronghorn tags for resident and Non resident to stay how it is. Wyoming Residents can already get 3 elk tags, 2 deer and Pronghorn Buck tags and numerous cow/doe tags. we need to keep the allocation as is so that we can have our Non resident hunters continue to enjoy the great state of Wyoming. Changing to 90/10 would also be detrimental to our wildlife funding as we would not sell as NR tags and thus not bring in as much money.
31	Leave it preference points and change the allocation to 50/50 preference points/random. there are to many sportspersons with high numbers of preference points that will lose their advantage.	These licenses are becoming once in a lifetime, why would we shorten the season for the hunter who draws one? Type 9 licenses mean a loss of opportunity to hunt the species and that pertains to any species. Also, if the idea of adding types 9 licenses is to increase license numbers, that is a mistake with these species. More licenses, especially with moose and bison, will mean more harvests and with lower numbers of animals available to hunt, this is contrary to good management.	Wyoming has great opportunity for residents to hunt these species, please leave our hunting season structures as is. Residents should get first opportunity at leftovers or a specific program to educate hunters on the current draw system should be implemented..	Wyoming currently has a good landowner license program and little change is needed to make it better. Corporation subdividing properties needs to be eliminated and any properties, especial smaller ones, that have not been specifically qualified by G&F personnel, should be. Absolutely NO transferable licenses!	The current trend in many areas statewide of lower mule deer and antelope numbers.
32	Support 100% This should help promote engagement in the conservation legacy of Wyoming as it broadens the base of stakeholders, especially among the next generation of hunters.	Seems a bit gimmicky. Rather than try to squeeze a little more opportunity out of existing hallmark big game species, there may be better approaches in order to issue more tags. Ex: figure out a way to phase out domestic grazing from historical sheep habitat, and also how to eliminate and reduce feral horse populations.	Antelope: The lowest hanging fruit, by far, is to END the loathsome One Shot hunt, which robs premium tags from residents and gifts them to celebrities, on the public's dollar. The G&F commission has demonstrated unwillingness to quit issuing the tags, so the best hope may be to take it back to the legislature to put this sordid chapter in WY antelope hunting to rest. Also, consider going to 90/10 R/NR, so more of the premium tags go to residents. NR's will still get the same total number of tags, since unused R quota spills over to the NR pool anyways. Lastly, raise the NR doe tag to $150, and reduce the # of tags available in the initial draw to one per NR hunter. Deer: Have the R general tag be good for WT only, and go to fully limited for MD with a 90/10 R/NR split. Elk: Move to 90/10 on LQ tags.	Aggressively pursue opening up landlocked public land hunting access.	Figure out a way to sunset the NR Wilderness Rule.	I have visited WY many times over the last 30 years to fish, backpack, camp, sightsee, and hunt. It is a wonderful state, and I have met many friendly people there including landowners, hunters, and outfitters. I am very grateful for the opportunities I have enjoyed and I am in full support of expanding resident hunting opportunities even if it comes at the expense of fewer opportunities for myself.
33			Please make 90/10 for elk deer and antelope a reality it’s what residents want. Do right by us please.		90/10 for elk deer and antelope.
34	This is a great idea! Something like Utah's hybrid system would be great! They give some tags to high point holders, and some tags in a bonus point draw. This would provide incentive to buy points for people who currently will never draw a preference point tag in the current system, but instead only have a small chance in the random pool. This would especially be great for children moving forward. I would also support increasing resident point fees as a way to replace lost revenue if we are able to give a larger percentage of tags to residents.	I think this is a great idea. I would also like to see more type 9 elk and deer tags, this would provide increased odds of drawing type 9 or any weapon tags by spreading out applicants.	I think Wyoming should decrease its non resident tag allocation percentages to be more in line with all other states in the mountain west. More along the lines of a 90/10 split. Wyoming gives more non resident tags than just about any other western state. I would also support increasing resident tag fees to make up for some of the lost revenue.	I support any ideas that increase hunter access on to private land.		Thank you!
35			Allow landowner licenses to be gifted or sold to another person, i.e. employee or a long time hunter that did not draw in that area.	Work on the cow elk population. Move the bull elk season later. Work on the white tail deer. Fund your wardens so the hunter management areas are not abused.
36	what is a weighted bonus point? how can we weigh in if dont know the difference.	not use archery only and wouldn't go for grizzly - just get them off endangered list so they can get under control - more important effects number of animals and our safety - so many are hunting elsewhere because of grizz	considering residents pay taxes all year long, we should have better opportunities to someone who comes into the state once a year even though their tags are more they are taking food from Wyoming residents. Also need to consider a better way for deer because too many young bucks [spikes & under 2x2] are being killed and we see less and less bucks during season and deer ; one idea is only let residents do mule & whitetail bucks and out of state'rs only whitetails for a year or two or make it across the state that have to have 3 points or better for 2-3 days then take a doe or shorten season or even stop mule deer buck tag for a year to let them grow up - if it keeps going like this in 5+ years there will be no mule deer in certain areas	get rid of not being able to cross corners from public to public [land lock too many public lands and extremely frustrating]	cows need to be off public lands before October 1 - for last 3-5 years cows have interfered with hunters and the deer and elk do not seem to co-habitat with them / antelope don't seem to care; the cows also rip up everything ; antelopes used to be over the counter as we recall but now drawn, should go back to over-counter because the antelope population is crazy, where we never saw antelope we are seeing hundreds+ and not elk or deer anymore where they used to be prominent species in those areas.	stiffer penalties for people [driving atv's ] off designated roads - we cannot go out in season or out of season without seeing people driving up mountains and areas no motorized vehicles are supposed to be. Also 1-800# that is manned to take calls of people seeing violations - too many times tried to get wardens but they are flooded w/ calls...example witnessed an out of state'r abusing their horses because the horse was sppoked on the mountain and wouldn't move - and we had to witness because we were behind them and no legal access around - it was horrifying.
37			Wyoming resident hunters have the unique opportunity to hunt some of the best trophy mule deer areas (specifically region G & H), great whitetail, Elk and antelope areas, every year with a guaranteed tag. There are limited quota areas that will always have more demand then available resources. Even taking tags originally meant to go to nonresident hunters will not increase the success % getting drawn by residents very much. There will also always be some loud voices screaming for more and more of the tags but it is up to the F&G and task forces such as this to balance out what is best for all of Wyoming (businesses and non-hunters as well) not just residents who will always selfishly (but understandably) say there are too many tags going to nonresidents.		Thousands of hunters, myself included, have been purchasing points over the last 16 years for Elk, Deer & Antelope and even longer for the big 5. Bringing in millions of dollars for the F&G department. It would be a form of a bait and switch scheme if there were to be any major changes in the allocation of big game tags by taking away from nonresident opportunities.
38	There is already a random element to the draw system.	This would take quota away from already tough to draw tags that have archery seasons. Scrap it.	Better draw odds for limited quota tags would be nice, but WY residents have a lot of opportunity. I just don't want to lose any more than we have.	Landowner tags should not be saleable or transferable to non-family. Keep it the way it is.	Exploring increasing quality opportunities, protecting and enhancing habitat. Forget trying to institute preference or bonus points systems.	You are tasked with working for all WY hunters. Please don't cater to special interests.
39	I think there should be a way found to give exponentially greater odds to the people who have invested the longest in the system	I think the goal was to make the limited resource more available to all. This would split the tags to much and go against one of the goals		This would only limit a great deal of the population from getting tags and go against the goal	Make the unlimited resident mule deer areas draw areas
40		This would be a great addition and opportunity for archery hunters in the state. I know that I have to compete with rifle hunters to get the opportunity to hunt any of these species with my bow.	Increasing walk in areas which are presently private property	Possibly offer archery only on some of these private properties if landowners agreed.		I would like to see more type 9 permits for elk immediately and possibly type 9 for antelope and deer in the future. Immediate attention should be given to cross over seasons where rifle hunters are hunting during archery pre seasons. I would like to see criteria established for those groups that receive commissioner licenses so that some of the funding goes back into wildlife, habitant and other projects that benefit our wildlife resources. Give strong consideration as to how many Commissioner licenses one organization can receive in one given year. Land owner permits: The landowner may only harvest one bull/buck and the balance of their permits must be cow/doe. Give strong consideration to the number of hunters that can apply for party permits to give other the opportunity to draw some coveted permits. The waiting period suggested for non residents to apply for leftover licenses seem only fair for resident hunters.
41	I support this idea, currently there is no reason to purchase these points unless you have been buying them since the beginning of the point system. You need to make them worth buying to people that currently have no hope of ever drawing a point assigned tag in the draw, but instead pray for a tag in the random part of the draw. Charge more for them and make them worth buying.	I support the addition of type 9 tags for all big game species.	I support increasing the percentage of tags that are given to residents, and reducing the amount that are given to non residents. Time to get with the times and match what every other western state is doing.	I support programs that provide public access to private land for hunting.	Increasing youth opportunities.
42	I am in full support of this. The current preference point system essentially requires max points to have a remote chance at drawing a tag. A squared bonus point system similar to that of Arizona or Nevada would encourage more low to mid level point holders to actually apply, rather than just buying points every year. A squared bonus point system would still give maximum points holders the best odds at drawing, and would give low-to-mid level point holders an outside chance at a tag. Perhaps this could lay the ground work to transition out of a preference point system to a fully random draw by gradually increase the percentage of random tags in the draw and gradually decreasing the percentage of preference/bonus point tags as max point holders are phased out.	I think this is a good idea to add at least a small portion of opportunity to these tags. I think with the increased demand for Big 5 tags, adding type 9 tags could potentially increase draw odds by removing archery hunters from Type 1 drawings.	My first suggestion is to keep the elk, deer and antelope draw completely random for residents. My second suggestion, in the spirit of the previous question, would be to add more type 9 tags for elk, deer and antelope statewide. In my region, there is only one hunt area (11) with type 9 tags, and I have never felt compelled to apply for it. It seems as though more and more residents are heading out for archery season each year, so why not try to spread the pressure out a little bit? I am primarily a bowhunter and I purchase a general elk tag every year. I typically do not hunt during rifle season, although sometimes I do just because I may still have a tag. I think adding more type 9 tags across the state would take more people like me out of the general hunt and be an effective way to spread hunting pressure out more across different seasons and hunt areas.	Increased promotion of the Access Yes program. I think this is a great program that should be more well-known by hunters and landowners alike.	Increased license fees for residents on antlered and either sex tags. Cow, calf, doe and fawn tags could remain the same price for sustenance hunters, but an increase on antlered and either sex tags, especially on general tags that allow one to hunt for up to six weeks, seems reasonable and an effective way to immediately increase funding. I would also like to see an Outfitter's license requirement for guided fishing trips. There is increasing pressure on our fisheries, and while I realize there are certain moratoriums in place on certain stretches of river, but I believe there needs to be more screening on who may operate guided fishing trips in Wyoming. Increased signage/education regarding floating the Upper North Platte River through Northgate Canyon. It seems like every year there are people floating this stretch of river who are completely oblivious to the fact that they may encounter up to class IV rapids. I have seen people launch drift boats and canoes from the Routt access point. This makes for increased pressure on this stretch of river, more inexperienced users getting into dangerous situations, and an increase in litter from overturned rafts and boats. Perhaps working in coordination with the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest in both Wyoming and Colorado to put up more signage at popular access points noting the dangers of class III-IV rapids in the months of May - early July could help mitigate this issue. Similar to the "Know Before You Go" signs you might see at a backcountry access gate of a ski resort.	I would like to thank you for assembling this task force, providing us with a platform for our voices to be heard, and fighting for wildlife, hunters and anglers in Wyoming!
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100