Lobbying Wyoming game and fish negatively affecting non-resident elk hunters

Wrong again and what Americans realize is that they don't have to physically be present on every acre of federal land to benefit from it.

It's not just hunters and angler's that benefit from public lands...it's loggers, miners, livestock producers, tourism of all types, and on and on and on.

The American public will not surrender it's birthright of public lands...just a fact.
Loggers, miners, livestock producers etc wouldn’t thrive if the land was private?

Your telling me the majority of tourist are hiking way back into these lands in mass?

Retaining 20% of public lands would cover 95% of current use as far as tourism goes.

Private ownership would make it easier to harvest lumber and minerals, plus states would get more tax rev.

Public land is government welfare.
 
When hunting and fishing licenses became a thing in the 50's or whenever that started, did you begin your protest then?
No. I wasn’t born. Not against regulation of the resource but we already live in a time that if you have money, you have arguably better hunting opportunity, regardless what your license plate says.

Not here to argue anymore, if you think it’s okay everywhere turns in to texas so be it.
 
Loggers, miners, livestock producers etc wouldn’t thrive if the land was private?

Your telling me the majority of tourist are hiking way back into these lands in mass?

Retaining 20% of public lands would cover 95% of current use as far as tourism goes.

Private ownership would make it easier to harvest lumber and minerals, plus states would get more tax rev.
No they wouldn't survive. Show me a cattle operation that pencils out in wyoming, Montana, Colorado, with land purchased at today's land prices and operating 100% on private land.

That math no worky-worky.
 
No they wouldn't survive. Show me a cattle operation that pencils out in wyoming, Montana, Colorado, with land purchased at today's land prices and operating 100% on private land.

That math no worky-worky.
They don’t have to purchase the land, get 500 people to invest $100k and form an LOA, lease out the grass to ranchers, sell the timber to keep the forest healthy and only allow the 500 investors on their land, think $50 million would buy a chunck and as soon as millions of acres are opened up for sale land prices would tank, allowing others to buy as well.

Look at how much people are willing to invest in 35 acres with a nice vacation home, wouldn’t be hard to find investors in LOA’s limiting access, yet improving the land for wildlife and bring back a small annual return on investment, if any.

Yes the math doesn’t work for a single operation where ranching is the focus.
 
Last edited:
Yes you do. You want to control how many NRs huntin in WY.
Right because wildlife is a state asset held in trust for the citizens of the state it resides in. Same applies to your state of residence. I won't be bitching about what your state charges me to hunt there, what tag numbers you limit me too, and surely won't ask your state to sell off federal lands because of those decisions.

That would be as outrageous as it is stupid.
 
They don’t have to purchase the land, get 500 people to invest $100k and form an LOA, lease out the grass to ranchers, sell the timber to keep the forest healthy and only allow the 500 investors on their land, think $50 million would buy a chunck and as soon as millions of acres are opened up for sale land prices would tank, allowing others to buy as well.
Like I said, Americans value public land more than divesting them to investors that want to privatize them.

Won't happen...and the last run at it failed miserably.
 
No. I wasn’t born. Not against regulation of the resource but we already live in a time that if you have money, you have arguably better hunting opportunity, regardless what your license plate says.

Not here to argue anymore, if you think it’s okay everywhere turns in to texas so be it.
I don't think that is true at all. I had 7 licenses last year and spent less than $400. I hunted all public land and didn't scratch 1% of what was available to me.
 
Yes buzz, everyone knows the argument. That is how it is. Got it. You like the residents of the state managing tag allocation, but the rest of the country to pay for the habitat and public land that becomes almost exclusive to residents. I get it. Everyone gets it. Im ready for the state of wyoming to manage all that great BLM land it has. You and lots of other smart people would do a great job with it. I have all the confidence in the world in you guys. That way, my tax money can fund wildlife and habitat projects that affect me, in my state.
Forgive me for being an advocate for your states rights, as well as mine.

Both me and the USSC are full of chit....
 
Like I said, Americans value public land more than divesting them to investors that want to privatize them.

Won't happen...and the last run at it failed miserably.
Ok, be interesting to see when it comes back around, it’s kinda like WY NR allocation reductions, that failed many times previously as well.
 
I don't think that is true at all. I had 7 licenses last year and spent less than $400. I hunted all public land and didn't scratch 1% of what was available to me.
Since we aren’t talking about Wyoming anymore and our own states, it certainly is that way here. I mean I did get a doe tag for my backyard last year if that counts .

I just see where it’s all going.

I agree Wyoming can manage it’s wildlife however it sees fit. I just find it ironic the arguments being made, on both sides. It’s bad for hunters as a whole.
 
Since we aren’t talking about Wyoming anymore and our own states, it certainly is that way here. I mean I did get a doe tag for my backyard last year if that counts .

I just see where it’s all going.

I agree Wyoming can manage it’s wildlife however it sees fit. I just find it ironic the arguments being made, on both sides. It’s bad for hunters as a whole.
It's a balance beam between opportunity in quantity or quality. Of those seven tags I had, 6 were not in the draw and I was unsucessful. The one I snagged in the draw for 11 points was successful. Just like somewhere else you said one can hunt for the cheap in WI, but with oodles of other folks.

It cannot be both ways, and if people want to hunt a certain state they genuinely need to consider moving there. Their choice not to tells me it isn't as important as they make on about it.
 
Ok, be interesting to see when it comes back around, it’s kinda like WY NR allocation reductions, that failed many times previously as well.
There's more awareness, influence, and support for public lands now than anytime I've been alive.

It's going to thrive more in the information age....
 
I 100% agree with you on that issue. Its the land management part we disagree on.
Then you shouldn't be complaining what any state charges nrs or what kind of limitations they put on you for allocations.

It's a states right to do so, period.
 
It's a balance beam between opportunity in quantity or quality. Of those seven tags I had, 6 were not in the draw and I was unsucessful. The one I snagged in the draw for 11 points was successful. Just like somewhere else you said one can hunt for the cheap in WI, but with oodles of other folks.

It cannot be both ways, and if people want to hunt a certain state they genuinely need to consider moving there. Their choice not to tells me it isn't as important as they make on about it.
Your last paragraph resonates with me and what I will look to in the future when my circumstances allow.

Until then I’ll continue to take whatever I can justify from other states sell me for exorbitant amounts of money.
 
Since we aren’t talking about Wyoming anymore and our own states, it certainly is that way here. I mean I did get a doe tag for my backyard last year if that counts .

I just see where it’s all going.

I agree Wyoming can manage it’s wildlife however it sees fit. I just find it ironic the arguments being made, on both sides. It’s bad for hunters as a whole.
So I guess giving nrs 13k elk tags...about double the 7250, more than 50% of pronghorn tags, and way more than 20% of our deer tags is bad?

Maybe it would be better if we held nrs to the caps and not one additional tag more.

Make no mistake nrs have it good in Wyoming....way better than most any other state they hunt as nrs....just a fact. Better tag numbers, better hunt quality, more access, and very affordable nr pricing.

I find it unbelievable there are any complaints from nrs. But I've discovered people complain about everything.
 
The right of states to manage the wildlife within its borders for the benefit of that states citizens.
I get that but WY is so dependent on federal aid it would seem nonresidents have more skin in the game in WY.
 
So I guess giving nrs 13k elk tags...about double the 7250, more than 50% of pronghorn tags, and way more than 20% of our deer tags is bad?

Maybe it would be better if we held nrs to the caps and not one additional tag more.

Make no mistake nrs have it good in Wyoming....way better than most any other state they hunt as nrs....just a fact.
Do you have stuff completely irrelevant to argue about pre typed? Makes no sense. Your telling me stuff I know like I should be thankful. And it in no way ties to the quote.

I treasure the current oppritunity I have in a number of states, including Wyoming.
 
There's more awareness, influence, and support for public lands now than anytime I've been alive.

It's going to thrive more in the information age....
Yes but that’s still a vast minority and national debt has never been more then it is now.
 
Back
Top