The Battle for License Allocations

A recent bill introduced to the Wyoming State Senate sought to redistribute hunting license allocations in favor of residents. The bill, SF0069, proposed a change to current license allocations for bighorn sheep, mountain goat, moose and bison. The Change would have cut nonresident tags by more than half.

Nonresident hunters in Wyoming are currently allocated 25 percent of the state’s bighorn sheep and moose licenses. SF0069 would have cut the nonresident allocation to 10 percent across the board.

This isn’t the only such bill Wyoming has faced over the past couple of years. Attempts have been made to introduce similar bills that would also put elk, deer and antelope licenses on a 90/10 split between residents and nonresidents. That’s about a 50 percent reduction in nonresident tags. In 2014, Wyoming House Bill 112 sought to do just that.

And Wyoming isn’t the only state to face this type of legislation. In 2006, Colorado amended its 60/40 split. Now in Colorado, 35 percent of licenses are set-aside for nonresidents in units that take fewer than six preference points to draw. In high-demand units that require 6 or more points on a three-year average, 20 percent are reserved for nonresidents. Even since 2006, Colorado has faced continued efforts to further push license allocations in favor of resident hunters.

Across the west, license allocations have been a topic of debate. As a resident of a particular state, how much right do I have to hunt locally? As a nonresident, but federal taxpayer, how much priority should I have in hunting on Forest Service or BLM land, in which I am an equal-part owner? While the Feds manage much of the land, the states manage the wildlife. So who wins?

There is certainly no easy answer. But as hunters, anglers and outdoor enthusiasts, it would serve us well to stick together on these issues. Because there’s more hanging in the balance than who gets more tags. These issues may have a significant impact on wildlife conservation, habitat, public access and even the very right to hunt. Without those things, none of us win.

In Wyoming, hunting tourism represents a $200 million industry each year. In addition to the broad economic impact, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD) receives most of its annual revenue from license sales. Sales of hunting licenses in Wyoming also contribute to Access Yes, a program to provide public access to hunting lands. Through the sales of Conservation Stamps, hunters are also responsible for sustaining winter feed grounds for elk. Without those feed grounds, there wouldn’t be a huntable population of elk in Wyoming.

Of course, it’s also true that conservation groups like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Mule Deer Foundation and others are funded almost entirely by hunters.

What percentage of Wyoming residents do you think hunt big game in Wyoming each year? 30 percent? 20 percent? If you guessed 15 percent, you’re still too high. It might be surprising, but only 11.8 percent of residents hunt big game in Wyoming. That amounts to about 69,000 hunters statewide.

I am a Colorado resident and an avid hunter. I hunt public land every year. I value my opportunities as much as anyone else. I wish I had more opportunities to draw tags. But I’m also aware of what keeps those opportunities intact. I accept that without everyone's involvement, there wouldn’t be a budget for wildlife management. There wouldn’t be the amount of public access that I enjoy each year. There wouldn’t be a strong voice in my state’s legislature to make sure that we always have the right to hunt.

Do I wish that I had access to 90 percent of the available hunting licenses in Colorado? Of course I do. But that’s not realistic. In the long run, it would be detrimental to my hunting opportunities.

Fortunately, Wyoming Senate Bill SF0069 was defeated earlier this year. In fact, it may have been the first time in any state that a license allocation measure in favor of residents was defeated after coming to a vote. If you are a nonresident with preference points in Wyoming, you can thank the Wyoming Hunter Defense Fund for protecting your investment. This won’t be the last time we see an issue like this in Wyoming. And it’s sure to continue appearing in other western states.

Before 2011, New Mexico allocated licenses in a 78/22 split. Now, only six percent of licenses are reserved for unguided nonresidents, while 10 percent are set aside for those who are contracted with a licensed outfitter. But it could have been worse. The original bill called for a 90/10 split with no allocation for outfitted hunters. Even now, there are groups still clamoring for additional cuts to the nonresident license pool.

When average hunters in states like Texas, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Michigan care less about western hunting, we lose advocates. I want more people around the U.S. to dream of bugling bulls. As a resident, when I scream, "Me! Me! Me!" in the battle for license allocations, I'll give up far more than I'll gain.

A small number of residents in a handful of western states won't support game and fish budgets. We won't be able to support organizations like the Elk Foundation. And we certainly won't be able to carry a big stick into any legislative battle.

If you hunt anywhere as a nonresident, make sure your voice is heard. Organizations like the Wyoming Hunter Defense Fund are popping up in each state. New Mexico and Colorado are working on similar efforts. Make sure you tell organizations like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation and Safari Club International how you feel. Remind them that your membership dollars are paying for your opportunities too. Nonresident donations to conservation organizations are a primary reason that western big game populations are thriving.

Wherever you hunt – as a resident or nonresident – remember that we are all in this together. As hunters and anglers, our best chance for success is to remain united in voice and in effort. If we don’t work together, more than your share of the license pool is at stake.