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

Not as much as you believe....I get around and talk to lots of folks.
How many in NY, CA, IL etc, states with little to none? I get you talk to those interested in BHA, far from a representation of the population as a whole.

Be interesting to see how many if you told them 20% is what is utilized and would be retained wouldn’t jump on board, also many in these states could easily afford their little western slice much easier once millions of acres are opened up for sale.
 
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.
Good, take them and say thank you.
 
1) 90/10 resident/non-resident allocation.
2) increase fees for non residents due to loss from 90/10
3) guides and outfitters set aside 30% of total non- residents allocation
4)resident preference for leftover tags
5) decrease in non-resident General elk tags
These are NOT laws but have been presented to Wyoming legislation . There was recent changes to the western "Big Five" negatively affected non-residents. There was a biological concern about the decrease in numbers of species hence decrease in tags. I also feel for non- resident hunters who have sent WY game and fish money for points only to have a decrease in odds or waiting longer to use them. Especially older hunters. I wasn't aware that there were biological concerns about elk /deer numbers? I realize the state of Wyoming owns the elk and it is their decision on how to manage the resource . I know nobody owes me nothing ,I'm not a resident, don't pay Wyoming taxes, and should sell my house, change jobs,uproot my family and move to Wyoming to hunt (really?) Also i,m a whinning, complaining, crybaby. Quit bitchin. Let's get all that out of the way. I'll be honest I have nothing against Wyoming residents, but geeze if some have their way this stuff is possibly heading in an unfavorable direction for a non-resident elk hunter. When it all comes down to it I guess one makes a personal decision whether they want to continue sending money to Wyoming game and fish


Reality-

There is a lot of human psychology at play in hunting. Jealousy…”they got more than me”. Bitterness…envy…laziness…greed.

These traits are human traits and the hunting world is full of people that exhibit them.

It is more common in waterfowl hunting in places like AR, where guys try to claim public land as theirs, fight, shoot at other hunters, vandalize people’s cars and boats, threaten their kids, and so on. Game wardens arrested a grown man in AR this season for punching a 16 year old kid that beat him to a spot on public land.

Now, hunting season in AR is called “the season of hate”.


So, AR responds by banning non residents on most public ground…even though the NR hunters weren’t the problem children.

The same pattern repeats. Hunters must stop hating other hunters, stop being jealous, and quit acting like children. It’s not non residents…and banning them won’t make you a better hunter.


Hunter numbers and political influence are the core of why we have any rights left. Eliminate access and that dies.


It’s pure shortsighted greed. Stupid…
 
How many in NY, CA, IL etc, state with little to none? I get you talk to thise interested in BHA, far from a representation of the population as a whole.
I talk to all kinds of people....just spent a week in PA...public land seems important to folks I talked with out that way.
 
I talk to all kinds of people....just spent a week in PA...public land seems important to folks I talked with out that way.
Did you randomly talk to people in downtown Pittsburgh or did you talk to people that attended a specific type of event they showed interest in attending? How many thousands did you talk to over the week to get a feel for how PA feels?

Did you talk to hunters mainly?
 
I get that but WY is so dependent on federal aid it would seem nonresidents have more skin in the game in WY.
Nope, wildlife and land ownership are mutually exclusive. Randy Newberg has a good video on it....Google it, kings deer irrc is the episode.

The only federal aid I'm aware of that states receive for wildlife is Pittman Robertson and dingell Johnson funding which is paid by excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment. Not even from the taxpayers, but a self funded and imposed tax.

All 50 states and iirc even the us territories receive.
 
Do you feel this added anything to the discussion? Just taking the opportunity for a cheap shot.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
No different than a lot of other comments from others who want to call names and make assumptions of anyone who want to discuss the issue. Added plenty to the discussion early on.
 
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.

The extra money for NR is in every state though. I can hunt low quality pronghorn here in CO every year on the cheap, or I can get a significantly better experience in WY/AZ/NM if it is worth the $ to me or the relocation. It isn't and I love pronghorn. It looks like Wisconsin has an elk hunt for $49 if one is lucky enough to draw. It looks like I can pay hundreds of dollars for a PA or KY elk license, I chose not to. Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota and Nebraska exclude non-res from enjoying their elk if I am doing the googles correctly. Maybe the thousands upon thousands of elk licenses available in other states aren't so egregiously biased as they are made out to be.
 
Did you randomly talk to people in downtown Pittsburgh or did you talk to people that attended a specific type of event they showed interest in attending? How many thousands did you talk to over the week to get a feel for how PA feels?

Did you talk to hunters mainly?
Yes, actually I did, right in Pittsburg at Fort Pitt and the duquesne incline.

The idea of public land needs no defense, only more defenders.
 
Nope, wildlife and land ownership are mutually exclusive. Randy Newberg has a good video on it....Google it, kings deer irrc is the episode.

The only federal aid I'm aware of that states receive for wildlife is Pittman Robertson and dingell Johnson funding which is paid by excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment. Not even from the taxpayers, but a self funded and imposed tax.

All 50 states and iirc even the us territories receive.
The state as a whole is dependent on federal funding more than most states in the country, opposite Colorado for example that comparatively needs far less. We fund your state’s lifestyle, perhaps some appreciation can be shown.
 
Or maybe I feel we need change, i’m ok selling 80% but if not another thought is a $50 weekly access permit or $2k annual pass for access, still sell off checker boarded lands.

Yes there is opportunity but really it’s about time we offload these lands, for most people in this nation they’ll never step foot on them.
I ve never set foot in the Atlantic I dont see why we had to stop dumping medical waste in there... or dumping toxic sludge in the Ohio River I mean that is a public water reource I dont use, plus it too expensive for me to fish it as a non resident, let it burn. That type of attitude isn't helping anyone.
 
Last edited:
The state as a whole is dependent on federal funding more than most states in the country, opposite Colorado for example that comparatively needs far less. We fund your state’s lifestyle, perhaps some appreciation can be shown.
We provide a lot of natural resources on the cheap, send water downstream, and export wayyy more energy than we consume...and provide a mountain of affordable nr hunting and lots of access for same.

I'm inclined to call it even...no thanks required.
 
Yes, actually I did, right in Pittsburg at Fort Pitt and the duquesne incline.

The idea of public land needs no defense, only more defenders.
I have a sneaking suspicion that most could careless about public, especially those worried about how they’ll feed their kids and keep them safe.

Public lands are mainly a rich white guy concept and being backed by what many would see it this way.

Wouldn’t take much for inner city people to say wtf, move those ear marked funds to where they will serve the many better and sell the lands.
 
I ve never set foot in the Atlantic I dont see why we had to stop dumping medical waste in there... or dumping toxic sludge in the Ohio River I mean that is a public water reource I dont use, plus it too expensive for me to fish it as a non resident, let it burn.
Hey you can buy your own paradise, why do you need a welfare handout?
 
We provide a lot of natural resources on the cheap, send water downstream, and export wayyy more energy than we consume...and provide a mountain of affordable nr hunting and lots of access for same.

I'm inclined to call it even...no thanks required.
Your states budget is close to 50% federal funded. I believe perhaps we need a 50/50 not 90/10 based on your states financial needs.
 
Back
Top