How to end NR Wyoming wilderness ban?

[flathead#2]

I view WY as a bad restaurant, I just refuse to eat there, or hunt there.

 

[tdhanses]

Yeah, no.

Those jobs and the tax revenue that floods throughout the state have a massive impact on a small population state.

That revenue would just replace the fed provided but look at other cash flush states for comparison to see what it would really be like. WY really could expand its taxes, add 4% more to sales taxes, instate a 6% income tax and bump property taxes, that would do much more then removing regulations but in reality they way the country is headed WY will probably see even more regulations on it’s main economic driver for the state.

Do WY residents own the main investments in the energy companies or are these companies owned by outside investors? Mining, oil, gas and coal investments seem to usually be by large corporations not residents of states.

Does WY pay every resident an annual payment like AK does from it’s oil?

 

[KHNC]

For a hunter chasing fish or birds in the wilderness, a 16-inch .223 would make an excellent defensive elk rifle during the rut, when bulls can get aggressive. Unfortunately, the mighty .223 isn't allowed for offensive use on elk.

Well poop, that wasnt addressed in the super long .223 thread. Dang, my fren will be disappointed

 

[KHNC]

Depends, are they a resident or nonresident?

both

 

[ThorM465]

You were just in wyoming hunting federal lands. You do understand that you can't hunt all federal lands for a wide variety of reasons.

This has been challenged in court and has set legal presence as a state right. Meaning it would need to overturned in court as a state right before your representative could impose a change.

The wilderness rule restricts such a small percentage of opportunity on available federal lands in wyoming not sure why it's always the focus point of these threads.

While I don't agree with the rule, I do think it has a very limited impact on most non resident hunters except for sheep or mountain goats hunters. Hell even when I lived in wyoming I never hunted a designated wilderness nor did any residents I knew there


Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

I disagree with your assertion here, but I'm no legal scholar. As I understand this ruling was in absence of legislation to directly address the issue? And the courts as a rule defer to the legislature's "authority" to regulate. That's why I think legislation could change this.

I didn't suggest we lobby to remove the state's ability to regulate the land. I explicitly suggested we demand that legislature require that the state not discriminate between NRs and Rs on federal lands. They would be able to regulate it, the regulations would simply have to be agnostic to state residency.

NRs sound like a bunch of victims - omg, your life is so hard after being victimized by mean old Wyoming. Get over the victim mentality and go hunt somewhere else.

Go hunt state land and get off my federal land.

Some are whining and will do nothing to further it and some will. Lobby. Write letters. If it changes then so be it. I just truly believe that as far as state “corruption” goes across all 50 this has to be pretty far down the list…

In the meantime…
View attachment 784719

While that's true in the grand scheme of things. However, this corruption is high on the list in the context of a western game hunting forum.

 

[KHNC]

For a hunter chasing fish or birds in the wilderness, a 16-inch .223 would make an excellent defensive elk rifle during the rut, when bulls can get aggressive. Unfortunately, the mighty .223 isn't allowed for offensive use on elk.

Apparently not in Colorado for elk or deer either. Damn, legit i was planning on taking my T3X/.223 on my 4th season hunt. Glad I decided to double check on that one. 300WSM it is.

 

[wyogoat]

I disagree with your assertion here, but I'm no legal scholar. As I understand this ruling was in absence of legislation to directly address the issue? And the courts as a rule defer to the legislature's "authority" to regulate. That's why I think legislation could change this.

I didn't suggest we lobby to remove the state's ability to regulate the land. I explicitly suggested we demand that legislature require that the state not discriminate between NRs and Rs on federal lands. They would be able to regulate it, the regulations would simply have to be agnostic to state residency.

Go hunt state land and get off my federal land.

While that's true in the grand scheme of things. However, this corruption is high on the list in the context of a western game hunting forum.

Then I applaud you for your solution on lobbying for a change in that. I’m willing to bet that it isn’t considered “corrupt” enough for anyone at a federal level to get involved with. I don’t recall it being addressed in any of the presidential debates this year…

 

[realunlucky]

I didn't suggest we lobby to remove the state's ability to regulate the land. I explicitly suggested we demand that legislature require that the state not discriminate between NRs and Rs on federal lands. They would be able to regulate it, the regulations would simply have to be agnostic to state residency.
/QUOTE]

You'll find this idea has also been challenged in court. I'll try and link it up. I forget it's something like USO vs Arizona or something

Edited case was Montoya vs Shroute. While Montoya was awarded judgment, and the ruling altered how Arizona awards non-resident tags, it also influences how other western states have worded thier non-resident tag policies. Be interesting to see a similar interstate commerce case argument two decades after this ruling.

 

[307]

That revenue would just replace the fed provided but look at other cash flush states for comparison to see what it would really be like. WY really could expand its taxes, add 4% more to sales taxes, instate a 6% income tax and bump property taxes, that would do much more then removing regulations but in reality they way the country is headed WY will probably see even more regulations on it’s main economic driver for the state.

Do WY residents own the main investments in the energy companies or are these companies owned by outside investors? Mining, oil, gas and coal investments seem to usually be by large corporations not residents of states.

Does WY pay every resident an annual payment like AK does from it’s oil?

Wyoming's taxation strategy has always been to fund the state through extraction industries and keep the tax burden for its residents as low as it could. Thus, oil, gas, mining, etc foot the bill for the vast majority of state funding. When extraction industries are hot, the money flows like crazy, to nearly everybody and to the state as well.

 

[wytx]

Court has ruled in states favor to discriminate against NRs for game hunting and we have a federal law that does the same.

 

[wyogoat]

Is this the point where we just turn this into a meme thread and all get along?

 

[StupidLightweight]

The odds are better that Joe Biden will dissolve the ATF and all gun control laws while smoking crack with his son on a yacht with Kim Jong Un in the South China Sea than even 10 percent of NR hunters passing on the chance to hunt elk in Wyoming.

 

[Bubblehide]

Court has ruled in states favor to discriminate against NRs for game hunting and we have a federal law that does the same.

And court rulings get overturned pretty regularly.

 

[wyogoat]

And court rulings get overturned pretty regularly.

On things like this that mean nothing to 99.9% of the American public?

 

[tdhanses]

On things like this that mean nothing to 99.9% of the American public?

I wouldn’t be shocked, there are many things most people don’t care about that change, truthfully those are the things most easily changed because you won’t have large scale outrage.

The precedent is what would matter and how it could be applied to other groups.

I think AK and WY are completely different scenarios as well.

 

[Poser]

 

[FAAFO]

Nonresidents can't DIY sheep, goats, or grizz in AK, but nonresidents human persons can represent themselves in every state and federal court in the country. The fact that you think this is a valid analogy is hilarious.

not true, many NR hunt DIY without a guide up here, NOK. Which is pretty generous. You know what’s BS? I can’t represent my family in court because of a BS law degree. That degree is welfare for attorneys!

is that a better anology for you?

Let’s end this dance and someone finish it with the *you’re reply

 

[wyogoat]

I wouldn’t be shocked, there are many things most people don’t care about that change, truthfully those are the things most easily changed because you won’t have large scale outrage.

The precedent is what would matter and how it could be applied to other groups.

I think AK and WY are completely different scenarios as well.

I say go for it and good luck in your endeavor. I totally support you using the legal system to get it changed. I just don’t think it will. It affects too few people on a single digit percentage portion of land. I’m not seeing a court being sympathetic to the cause when access is granted for so many other things on the same land. Maybe I’m wrong.

 

[FAAFO]

I visited WY for an Elk hunt for the first time this year. Without exception every resident I interacted with were great people, I'd love to live amongst. Many even expressed that they understood NRs were getting screwed in the current system. I apologize, that isn't entirely true, there was a coffee shop in Pinedale being ran by a Dbag who was obviously a west coast import. Other than him... Anyways...

Unfortunately there are many Rs here who can go choke yourselves with a rusty chain. @FAAFO , after reading through your posts here I'm sincerely impressed that you're literate enough to participate in this conversation.

I advocate governance at the lowest possible level as a rule. I 100% support state sovereignty in controlling state land, NR access to state land is a privilege. I don't mind paying a higher price and having less access to game species on federal land within reason. I kind of do, but not enough to be worth fighting over. The problem here is that the western states, such as WY wilderness access & Bison tag costs, have abused their authority over federal lands for to long and have gone to far.

When the residents of the state refuse to be reasonable, we NRs are left with but one recourse. If I must lobby my congressmen in DC to change the law such that it is illegal to discriminate against Americans access to and usage of federal lands based on residence that's exactly what I'll do. You may laugh at the idea of my single voice. However, I assure you that a few thousand similar letters from NRs on this forum will start a conversation in DC and this is something that very easily could be slipped into an omnibus bill and serve as a campaign trail success story for 100s of Congressmen trying to get re-elected.

One of the principles this country was found on is that taxation entitles you to representation. You Rs can not logically argue that we NRs are not stakeholders when you're using our fees(taxes) to fund you're ability to hunt and fish your state.

Great post! If you want another crack at WY elk send me a DM. I have enough points available to point share and I’ll take you to get your first bull. Serious offer. But one thing for sure is, we will not drive a 1000 miles road hunting and listening for rifle shots. Just let me know. I could fit you in with our group next fall. May have to go special price, just need to crunch the numbers. Again sorry you didn’t get an elk in one of the most overpopulated units in WY.

 

[Flyjunky]

I’m not seeing a court being sympathetic to the cause when access is granted for so many other things on the same land.

Isn’t that the crux though? Every other activity is allowed to NR’s, except big game hunting. To me, I see a court seeing it 180° opposite.