I applied last month for the first time.
I'm not complaining about anything. I'm just making the argument that states shouldn't have the authority to discriminate against NRs on federal land. I do think that the parody between NRs and residents in these states that get substantial federal funds has become a little ridiculous, but maybe I'm wrong there.
That's a reasonable assumption, but no I don't think the Feds should manage the wild life. I think governance should be done at the lowest level feasible. I've already stated that having the feds manage the game is a can of worms that would worse for us all in the end. But if the state is unwilling to treat NRs fairly what other option are we left with? Honest question.
In your latter paragraph I think your hitting on the amount of federal land in WY being unjust. I think there's a great argument for that and I've heard great arguments that the Fed retaining ownership of the land after WY became a state was Unconstitutional. I tend to agree with that argument. However, as long as it remains federally owned land, my argument stands. FWIW if there was a movement for western states to take back ownership of their land, I'd lean towards supporting them with certain stipulations.
