How to end NR Wyoming wilderness ban?

[RMM]

Listened to the same podcast. Rinella then went on to explain that he had it on very good authority that if someone were to be cited, and had somewhat competent legal representation, the law would not stand up in the courts.

 

[Bubblehide]

From a legal perspective, the way I see it, the state does not have authority to regulate federal lands. If the state issues a nonresident a tag, the state cannot dictate he/she hunt any federal land area with a guide. But, as I'm sure we are all aware, many states do what they want, despite their legal limitations. If they enforce this, sooner or later someone will fight it, and very likely win.

 

[TaperPin]

If it is popular, then I would like to know just how many WY residents would still support it once they were unable to hunt wilderness in other states. If its purely financial, then this obviously does nothing to change it.

Although it happens, few even dedicated hunters in Wyoming feel the need to go outside the state, so in the range of effective carrots and sticks, hunting someone else’s wilderness isn’t much of a motivating factor. We are pretty spoiled here.

As you said, the motivation for you is it would be great for nonresidents to hunt these areas more cheaply by avoiding outfitters - that’s not much of a sale’s pitch to suggest less money for giving away access. Especially after the Covid invasion and work from home guys that have moved here, much of the state has little interest in giving away more of the value our wilderness provides.

 

[StupidLightweight]

Stupid law, simple as that, and I'm saying this as a resident. Unfortunately, said stupid law will remain until someone — likely an attorney — becomes the test case. With enough time and money, I don't see how the courts would uphold the law.

Two years after moving to WY, I cashed out my nonresident points on a good elk unit. I had a WY driver's license, owned a home, but was still a nonresident (by my choice) in the eyes of Fish & Game. Before the hunt, I wondered if I could I legally hunt the wilderness and called the game warden to find out.

He said, "Boy, that's an interesting situation, and I get your confusion. However, since you're hunting with a nonresident tag, technically, you aren't allowed to hunt wilderness without a resident or guide."

What a joke. To prevent the 1-in-a-1,000 chance of getting busted, I brought along a buddy with a resident hunting license. Thank God he kept me safe.

 

[TaperPin]

From a legal perspective, the way I see it, the state does not have authority to regulate federal lands. If the state issues a nonresident a tag, the state cannot dictate he/she hunt any federal land area with a guide. But, as I'm sure we are all aware, many states do what they want, despite their legal limitations. If they enforce this, sooner or later someone will fight it, and very likely win.

There’s no law against nonresidents visiting wilderness areas. Go there as often as you want. The state does own the wildlife so if you just can’t hunt anywhere you want.

 

[TaperPin]

Stupid law, simple as that, and I'm saying this as a resident. Unfortunately, said stupid law will remain until someone — likely an attorney — becomes the test case. With enough time and money, I don't see how the courts would uphold the law.

Two years after moving to WY, I cashed out my nonresident points on a good elk unit. I had a WY driver's license, owned a home, but was still a nonresident (by my choice) in the eyes of Fish & Game. Before the hunt, I wondered if I could I legally hunt the wilderness and called the game warden to find out.

He said, "Boy, that's an interesting situation, and I get your confusion. However, since you're hunting with a nonresident tag, technically, you aren't allowed to hunt wilderness without a resident or guide."

What a joke. To prevent the 1-in-a-1,000 chance of getting busted, I brought along a buddy with a resident hunting license. Thank God he kept me safe.

You want to hunt as a non resident? That’s some kind of new math. The odds of you getting busted are much higher than 1-1000. You must not have been here long or you’d know that.

 

[TaperPin]

Listened to the same podcast. Rinella then went on to explain that he had it on very good authority that if someone were to be cited, and had somewhat competent legal representation, the law would not stand up in the courts.

Everyone wants something for nothing. They see taking something that isn’t theirs as a good thing.

 

[StupidLightweight]

Trust me, I didn't want to hunt as a nonresident, but I also didn't want to lose my 12 nonresident preference points. As it worked out, I was guaranteed to draw a tag that was approximately 25-percent odds for a resident. Cost me $1,200, but it was worth it.

 

[Bubblehide]

There’s no law against nonresidents visiting wilderness areas. Go there as often as you want. The state does own the wildlife so if you just can’t hunt anywhere you want.

I get tge state owns the wildlife, that was not the point. Clearly the state regulates the hunting of wildlife. But the state is regulating hunting wildlife on federal lands, specifically denying nonresident hunting on federal wilderness. The state simple lacks authority to do this. They can legally regulate access to state lands all they want, within the law, considering it is public land, sovthey have some limitations there too.

 

[bergie]

Other than the WY wilderness rule, what else would this reciprocity apply too? Can’t just mish mosh game regulations across state lines. The tag price reciprocity that’s brought up often is ridiculous. Don’t need tag quotas broken down any further than simply Res/NR.

So what else? Or just another opportunity to start a Wy wilderness rule beat the dead horse rant.

It was brought up in the podcast that states already have reciprocity laws that dictate fishing methods of take, the example being spearing northern pike in North Dakota, so yes they already 'mish mosh' regulations.

I agree that not everything needs or should be regulated, and this was not to rant about how dumb of a rule it is (that has been covered and the only ones who disagree are the ones who benefit by it).

This was meant to gauge the interest in how Wyoming residents would feel about being limited in other states the way non residents are in theirs. So far it sure seems like WY residents don't much care about going out of state, which is not a result I really expected, but thinking about it more maybe I should have.

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

Looks like them Duke Missouri boys are at it again!

 

[huntsd]

Listening to a podcast toady and they brought up the idea of states offering reciprocity in reference to hunting laws. The example that caught my attention was the Wyoming ban on non resident hunters to be on federally designated wilderness, alone. What neighboring states like Montana and Idaho could do to combat this is pass a mandate that basically says 'non residents from another state are subjected to the same mandates that exist in their home state'. By doing this, Montana residents could hunt Idaho wilderness and vice versa, but since Wyoming does not allow folks from other states to hunt 'their'(our?) wilderness, they would not be allowed to hunt the wilderness areas in either Montana or Idaho.

To state the obvious; if Wyoming residents wanted to continue to enjoy the same benefit of hunting wilderness in other states, they could go to their own game commission to get the ban overturned in Wyoming. Thus creating a situation where they control their own access to wilderness areas in other states.

Full disclosure, I have never hunted Wyoming, but will some day and I damn sure wouldn't hire a guide to hunt so as it stands now hunting the wilderness there is out of the question.

My opinion is obviously self serving, but for the life of me I can't poke a hole in this, so I am interested in the discussion.

passing a law like this could light a fire under wyo residents to remove their law. I would support it.

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

Not in favor of more regulation. It could start out with the intent of having WY change their law, next thing you know you need a guide to hunt any wilderness in the west as a NR.

The idea of reciprocity with regards to cougar hunting (which is how they started the convo) is even more stupid.

 

[bergie]

hunting someone else’s wilderness isn’t much of a motivating factor. We are pretty spoiled here.

This is a perspective I did not see coming. Wyoming must be nice. And that is coming from a state that I am not sure I would ever want to leave, cuz I think its pretty nice too!

As you said, the motivation for you is it would be great for nonresidents to hunt these areas more cheaply by avoiding outfitters

I wouldn't say I am trying to be cheap. In fact the reason I wouldn't hire an outfitter to hunt really has nothing to do with money. I would argue that spending more money to have someone take me to their honey hole and show me where the game is, only for me to be the trigger man, then packing said game out for me only cheapens the experience.

This is my personal preference and I understand I am in a different situation than others so I am not casting judgement on folks who hire a guide. Having said that, I'd rather kill a 150" buck or 270" bull on my own, than kill a 200" buck or 375" bull with a guide.

 

[TaperPin]

Something for nothing. Not a very strong argument.

 

[steelheadmike]

I get tge state owns the wildlife, that was not the point. Clearly the state regulates the hunting of wildlife. But the state is regulating hunting wildlife on federal lands, specifically denying nonresident hunting on federal wilderness. The state simple lacks authority to do this. They can legally regulate access to state lands all they want, within the law, considering it is public land, sovthey have some limitations there too.

This is what the legal case would have to be based on. Can a state limit access to federally owned lands for the take of big game? Where it would get sticky is whether not limiting access factors into the take of big game? They could easily re-write the law and make separate unit designations for wilderness only units. Tags in those units could only be allocated through the Outfitter pool. It would be sucky but that's what would happen, imo.

It was brought up in the podcast that states already have reciprocity laws that dictate fishing methods of take, the example being spearing northern pike in North Dakota, so yes they already 'mish mosh' regulations.

I agree that not everything needs or should be regulated, and this was not to rant about how dumb of a rule it is (that has been covered and the only ones who disagree are the ones who benefit by it).

This was meant to gauge the interest in how Wyoming residents would feel about being limited in other states the way non residents are in theirs. So far it sure seems like WY residents don't much care about going out of state, which is not a result I really expected, but thinking about it more maybe I should have.

The main difference in the fishing methods and the federal land access is that the state controls anything having to do with take methods. A more apples to apples comparison was if the state was preventing NR spearing on Bureau of Rec waters but not state waters.

 

[bergie]

Something for nothing. Not a very strong argument.

The argument in reality is something for something.

As it stands now WY residents can hunt other wilderness areas for 'nothing' but NR in WY must pay to hunt them? That sounds more like something for nothing than anything I have said.

 

[justinspicher]

This is as dumb as the guide requirements in Alaska.Nothing more than a way for the state to dictate regulation over nothing.

 

[Flyjunky]

There’s no law against nonresidents visiting wilderness areas. Go there as often as you want. The state does own the wildlife so if you just can’t hunt anywhere you want.

I always find this line of thinking hilarious. Can I, as a non-resident, go fish in the wilderness? Can I keep and eat a fish I catch in the wilderness?

It’s a money grab by a small group of people, plain and simple. Just another group with their hand out for govt assistance, while most likely criticizing other groups who do the same.

 

[Flyjunky]

Something for nothing. Not a very strong argument.

Isn’t that a little bit of the pot/kettle thing? If Wyoming residents want to keep the public off the land they pay for, maybe Wyoming should pay for those lands themselves?