Wyoming G&F, how de we get a voice as NR's?

[Rifleman86]

Man this is like flashbacks of the old wyoming threads. Fordguy , tdhanses , and even buckeye rifleman showed up . Pretty civil so far (wonder why?) Lol

Oh man, getting called out by name. Not sure if that’s a good or a bad thing @Gutshot007!

I guess given that I’ll give my thoughts. This is obviously a contentious issue and it is for good reason. Whenever you have a contentious issue I think it’s important to lay out commonly held facts before you can start working together toward a solution.

The facts, as I see them…

Wildlife in any state is held in trust for the state, and primarily for the residents of that state. I think most people posting here can agree that the lions share or any hunting opportunities should be allocated to state residents first. How much exactly? That’s where things get dicey, but we can all agree that residents do and should come first.

Nonresidents pay for the vast majority of management costs, particularly in high demand western states. This is beneficial to state residents with regard to lower tag costs and better funded management. However this has left some nonresidents with a sour taste in their mouths, particularly with the amount of opportunities that have been lost primarily among nonresidents in recent years.

Western states not only hold the vast majority of highly desirable species like elk, mule deer, antelope, etc. they hold the vast majority of federal land, and most of those animals live and are hunted on federal public land. Though the states manage the game in most instances, the federal government, along with the nonresidents from 49 other states, pay for the management of the land itself, as well as set the rules we all must abide by while recreating on said federal land.

In theory, the Feds could come in tomorrow and say “no more hunting on FS/BLM land.” This would be highly unlikely, even with a far left administration, but I think it’s important to keep in mind it’s in the realm of possibility.

Also, I think it’s important to keep in mind that the mantra “the Feds manage the land, the state manages the game” is not some set in stone thing. We don’t have to look far for political efforts to transfer land back to the states, and we only have to look to the ESA for instances of the Feds managing game. I don’t think either of those things are good, but I think too many times that is repeated like it couldn’t change. All it would take is the right political climate.

The problem…

The big western states have something that few other states have but something that every hunter dreams about. A diverse set of game situated on a vast amount of public land, and epic landscapes to top it all off.

As a result, competing interests groups are going to want to take that opportunity and either steal it or exploit it for profit.

The 4 big stakeholders (residents, nonresidents, landowners and outfitters) all want their slice of the pie. Unfortunately, only 3 of those stakeholders have much voice with state politicians passing the legislation that ultimately guides allocation and management decisions. As a result, the stakeholder with the smallest voice (nonresidents, particularly DIY nonresidents) is ultimately going to lose.

We can already see it happening, hence the OPs post.

Having said that, I get where the visceral reaction of residents come from. They have all these special interests coming for “their” opportunities, and they see nonresidents asking for a voice as one more person trying to take a slice of the pie.

But it doesn’t take a long trip down the “what if” trail to see where things are headed once the nonresidents DIY’s get shoved to the wayside. Increased tags for landowners and outfitters. Follow the money… Eventually those highly sought after tags are going to start coming from the resident pool to feed the outfitter industry. Nonresidents eventually lose interest, and the whole thing sorta collapses because “big game trophy hunting” is no longer palatable nationwide, especially on that federal land along side the REI types.

So what am I saying?

It’s a real pickle. I don’t know what the solution is.

What I do know is that the last time we faced major threats to recreational hunting and wildlife we had some smart people come together, set aside their personal biases, and even their personal self interests and put forward some real out of the box, somewhat drastic solutions. It worked, thank God.

I think the first thing we have to do is realize the vast majority of us want the same things, and that together we are a lot bigger voice than the special interests that are attempting to destroy our current model because of shortsighted profiteering.

 

[Rifleman86]

I’ll add this… I think Wyoming is playing with a bit of fire pushing the envelope on this stuff.

I think the mantra of “it’s state game, the Feds have no authority!” falsehood has been repeated here (and no doubt in the Wyoming legislature and wildlife commission meetings) enough by certain person(s) that it’s believed as matter of fact.

However I’ll introduce everyone to 50 CFR 20.133

“Hunting regulations for crows” Federal law that dictates overarching left and right lateral limits for states with regard to Crow hunting of all things. I’ll remind folks that crows are generally not considered a migratory species, making this distinctive from federal law regarding bird species that migrate across the US.

The Feds have already done it with crows for Gods sake… It’s certainly within the Feds purview and authority to start dictating left and right lateral limits with regards to how states manage big game hunting, particularly on federally owned lands.

For the record I think doing this would be opening a Pandora’s box that would likely serve to bite us all in the ass in the long run. Rarely do the Feds butt their heads into state business and make things better.

But I think Wyoming is making a poor bet that either it can’t happen or there would never be any political willpower to make it happen. For every political action there is always a reaction. Never be so obtuse to believe the political winds or willpower won’t change. It wasn’t that long ago there was enough political will to pass a federal amendment banning beer for Gods sake, and 50 years ago you would’ve been nuts to think weed would be legal anywhere.

The states for the most part have done an excellent job managing game fairly for all stake holders. I hope they continue to do so. But there are certainly some worrying trends around the west, particularly in Wyoming.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

What does montana charge for a NR elk tag? Do they give out an unlimited amount?

 

[Rifleman86]

What does montana charge for a NR elk tag? Do they give out an unlimited amount?

Roughly $1000 for an elk tag or $1200 for a “big game combo.” 17,000 NR tags max for those combined.

Limited entry bull tags are drawn from within that 17000.

 

[Archer86]

I’ll add this… I think Wyoming is playing with a bit of fire pushing the envelope on this stuff.

I think the mantra of “it’s state game, the Feds have no authority!” falsehood has been repeated here (and no doubt in the Wyoming legislature and wildlife commission meetings) enough by certain person(s) that it’s believed as matter of fact.

However I’ll introduce everyone to 50 CFR 20.133

“Hunting regulations for crows” Federal law that dictates overarching left and right lateral limits for states with regard to Crow hunting of all things. I’ll remind folks that crows are generally not considered a migratory species, making this distinctive from federal law regarding bird species that migrate across the US.

The Feds have already done it with crows for Gods sake… It’s certainly within the Feds purview and authority to start dictating left and right lateral limits with regards to how states manage big game hunting, particularly on federally owned lands.

For the record I think doing this would be opening a Pandora’s box that would likely serve to bite us all in the ass in the long run. Rarely do the Feds butt their heads into state business and make things better.

But I think Wyoming is making a poor bet that either it can’t happen or there would never be any political willpower to make it happen. For every political action there is always a reaction. Never be so obtuse to believe the political winds or willpower won’t change. It wasn’t that long ago there was enough political will to pass a federal amendment banning beer for Gods sake, and 50 years ago you would’ve been nuts to think weed would be legal anywhere.

The states for the most part have done an excellent job managing game fairly for all stake holders. I hope they continue to do so. But there are certainly some worrying trends around the west, particularly in Wyoming.

Depending where crows are located they are considered a migratory bird might be the reason they are covered under the migratory birds act?

It's a slipper slope if you guys really want to try and say the states doesn't have the authority to manage the game in said state I would think that the large private land owners would have challenged this by now to have a unlimited kill tag for there private ranches ie elk mountian ranch look what that guy has wasted trying to fight corner crossing and on top of that what percentage of Americans are hunters? I bet most would like wildlife managed for there viewing pleasure and petting zoo not for us to be hunting.

Unfortunately most of the wyoming problems have been due to wealthy nr hunters Not the diy nr. if you think wyoga hasn't asked its clients if they where willing to pay more money for a tag if they could get it more often then you are sitting under a rock as a resident I commented against that and the elk regions I think it's going to make it even harder to get tags with the 3 region system then it was and that is going to cause wyoga to search for a new way to get the wealthy nr hunters tags. Just a FYI the task force doesn't listen to the average resident hunter either.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Roughly $1000 for an elk tag or $1200 for a “big game combo.” 17,000 NR tags max for those combined.

Limited entry bull tags are drawn from within that 17000.

Dang....where's the outrage for montana?

 

[tdhanses]

I’ll add this… I think Wyoming is playing with a bit of fire pushing the envelope on this stuff.

I think the mantra of “it’s state game, the Feds have no authority!” falsehood has been repeated here (and no doubt in the Wyoming legislature and wildlife commission meetings) enough by certain person(s) that it’s believed as matter of fact.

However I’ll introduce everyone to 50 CFR 20.133

“Hunting regulations for crows” Federal law that dictates overarching left and right lateral limits for states with regard to Crow hunting of all things. I’ll remind folks that crows are generally not considered a migratory species, making this distinctive from federal law regarding bird species that migrate across the US.

The Feds have already done it with crows for Gods sake… It’s certainly within the Feds purview and authority to start dictating left and right lateral limits with regards to how states manage big game hunting, particularly on federally owned lands.

For the record I think doing this would be opening a Pandora’s box that would likely serve to bite us all in the ass in the long run. Rarely do the Feds butt their heads into state business and make things better.

But I think Wyoming is making a poor bet that either it can’t happen or there would never be any political willpower to make it happen. For every political action there is always a reaction. Never be so obtuse to believe the political winds or willpower won’t change. It wasn’t that long ago there was enough political will to pass a federal amendment banning beer for Gods sake, and 50 years ago you would’ve been nuts to think weed would be legal anywhere.

The states for the most part have done an excellent job managing game fairly for all stake holders. I hope they continue to do so. But there are certainly some worrying trends around the west, particularly in Wyoming.

Yes it would but only 1% of the population would care.

 

[tdhanses]

What does montana charge for a NR elk tag? Do they give out an unlimited amount?

$1100 I think, includes elk, deer and small game, elk alone is $700ish I think. They also give out 17k of the combo tags, not sure how many elk only for NR, so let’s say 3x the number of tags are given to the NR when compared to WY and for less.

 

[tdhanses]

Depending where crows are located they are considered a migratory bird might be the reason they are covered under the migratory birds act?

It's a slipper slope if you guys really want to try and say the states doesn't have the authority to manage the game in said state I would think that the large private land owners would have challenged this by now to have a unlimited kill tag for there private ranches ie elk mountian ranch look what that guy has wasted trying to fight corner crossing and on top of that what percentage of Americans are hunters? I bet most would like wildlife managed for there viewing pleasure and petting zoo not for us to be hunting.

Unfortunately most of the wyoming problems have been due to wealthy nr hunters Not the diy nr. if you think wyoga hasn't asked its clients if they where willing to pay more money for a tag if they could get it more often then you are sitting under a rock as a resident I commented against that and the elk regions I think it's going to make it even harder to get tags with the 3 region system then it was and that is going to cause wyoga to search for a new way to get the wealthy nr hunters tags. Just a FYI the task force doesn't listen to the average resident hunter either.

Well with wolves now in every western state it won’t be long before moose, deer and eventually elk could be considered endangered. In Yellowstone there were 21k elk before wolves, now there are less then 2k I believe. Wolves have hit deer even harder. Won’t take much more before we see it reduce all our opportunities, especially if the feds decide to save them and increase numbers.

 

[tdhanses]

Dang....where's the outrage for montana?

What 3x the tags vs WY should create outrage? For $1100 or so a NR can get an elk and deer combo that takes 2pts. Not a bad deal compared to WY. MT also allows the come home to hunt for NR that doesn’t effect these NR tag numbers and is 100% guaranteed. Remember the 17k tags are for the elk/deer combo, they also give out elk only tags to NR.

WY Gen is $700ish and 5pts, and the special is now $2k and was 4pts last year, oh and only 7,250 tags but yes they have been closer to 10k when you include all tags actually given for elk when residents think cows are not worth hunting. For deer and antelope residents get multiple tags, some get up to 12 tags a year, yet NR are the issue.

Out of all states WY now gives out the fewest tags to NR’s, yet charges the most and residents still complain they can kill anything because of the few NR that are allowed to come hunt. Maybe WY needs to do away with the resident otc tags so there is less pressure from the 60k or 10% of residents that hunt, even resident hunters in WY are the minority there.

 

[Rifleman86]

Depending where crows are located they are considered a migratory bird might be the reason they are covered under the migratory birds act?

It's a slipper slope if you guys really want to try and say the states doesn't have the authority to manage the game in said state I would think that the large private land owners would have challenged this by now to have a unlimited kill tag for there private ranches ie elk mountian ranch look what that guy has wasted trying to fight corner crossing and on top of that what percentage of Americans are hunters? I bet most would like wildlife managed for there viewing pleasure and petting zoo not for us to be hunting.

Unfortunately most of the wyoming problems have been due to wealthy nr hunters Not the diy nr. if you think wyoga hasn't asked its clients if they where willing to pay more money for a tag if they could get it more often then you are sitting under a rock as a resident I commented against that and the elk regions I think it's going to make it even harder to get tags with the 3 region system then it was and that is going to cause wyoga to search for a new way to get the wealthy nr hunters tags. Just a FYI the task force doesn't listen to the average resident hunter either.

I think you are misrepresenting what I’m saying.

The states currently have the authority to manage wildlife simply because the federal government hasn’t taken that authority. I’m not saying that’s how it should be, I’m saying that’s how it is. If it wasn’t, things like the ESA, federal bird legislation, etc wouldn’t matter and wouldn’t exist.

I’m also not saying the Feds should manage wildlife. But I’m saying that if states mismanage it badly enough, or with enough little regard to what the other 49 states think, they could be inviting that to happen.

 

[dirtytough]

Didn’t the feds shut down hunting in AK to even residents on Fed land? There is “whining” in the caribou forum I believe.

It wouldn’t take much if the 97% of the country that doesn’t hunt pushed “safety” on federal land. Hunters kill each other every year. A hiker got killed in Washington when she was mistaken for a bear.

Aren’t there multiple hunts in Colorado that you are only allowed to hunt certain days of the week?

Seems like they are already slowly shutting it down on fed land from what I can see.

 

[tdhanses]

Didn’t the feds shut down hunting in AK to even residents on Fed land? There is “whining” in the caribou forum I believe.

It wouldn’t take much if the 97% of the country that doesn’t hunt pushed “safety” on federal land. Hunters kill each other every year. A hiker got killed in Washington when she was mistaken for a bear.

Aren’t there multiple hunts in Colorado that you are only allowed to hunt certain days of the week?

Seems like they are already slowly shutting it down on fed land from what I can see.

Yup they did and recently.

Think in CO that is on state land but some units hit hard with winter kill had a reduced season from the state as well, once wolves take out 50% of the animals we’ll see big reductions in CO and cougar hunting will go away in a year or two, already a push for it.

This will bleed into WY and MT with time.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Didn’t the feds shut down hunting in AK to even residents on Fed land? There is “whining” in the caribou forum I believe.

I believe that has to do with ANILCA, but i could be incorrect. I don't live in Alaska and certainly wouldn't demand anything from them.

They mandate guides for certain species for non-residents, where's the outrage for that? Nope, just Wyoming.....

 

[tdhanses]

I believe that has to do with ANILCA, but i could be incorrect. I don't live in Alaska and certainly wouldn't demand anything from them.

They mandate guides for certain species for non-residents, where's the outrage for that? Nope, just Wyoming.....

Yup mandate guides, same as WY in wilderness and there is all kinds of outrage for that BS but courts have ruled it ok for both. AK doesn’t charge $2k to hunt even a moose as a NR which doesn’t require a guide even. When WY is ever allowed to hunt grizz by the FEDS, you know hunting like AK, maybe they’ll require a guide as well, I mean WY already set their NR tag at $6k, 6x what AK charges and only a few tags may be possible when the FEDS let them hunt them vs AK letting 1,000’s on NR hunt them, very similar, we should be outraged.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Yup mandate guides, same as WY in wilderness and there is all kinds of outrage for that BS but courts have ruled it ok for both. AK doesn’t charge $2k to hunt even a moose as a NR which doesn’t require a guide even. When WY is ever allowed to allow grizz by the FEDS, you know hunting like AK, maybe they’ll require a guide as well, I mean WY already set their NR tag at $6k, 6x what AK charges and only a few tags may be possible when the FEDS let them hunt them vs AK letting 1,000’s on NR hunt them.

If you don't like the special tag price, perhaps the regular price tag in the 600 range is more reasonable.

If you don't want to pay for a grizzly tag, if they're ever delisted, don't. Go to MT or ID.

You do realize submitting applications is voluntary correct? Nobody is making you purchase a special elk tag.

 

[tdhanses]

If you don't like the special tag price, perhaps the regular price tag in the 600 range is more reasonable.

What’s the regular tag price for grizz for a NR In WY?

WY has made hunting a business and cares only about how they can get the most out of it from the NR, it’ll bite them in the butt eventually., yet NR make up less then 10% of people hunting and residents still complain about crowding by them, again WY needs to do away with resident otc tags, just is what it is if residents can’t handle a few NR killers coming to the state, that residents have maybe a 1/200 chance of running into.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

What’s the regular tag price for grizz for a NR?

WY has made hunting a business and cares only about how they can get the most out of it from NR, it’ll bite them in the butt eventually.

You keep saying "2k" for a tag, so I'm assuming you mean the special elk tag, completely ignoring the regular tag price. What's the price for a REGULAR FULL PRICE ELK TAG?

You are upset about the price of a tag (grizzly) that you can't even apply for or obtain. As I said, apply for a MT or ID grizzly tag if you want.

 

[dirtytough]

Yup they did and recently.

Think in CO that is on state land but some units hit hard with winter kill had a reduced season from the state as well, once wolves take out 50% of the animals we’ll see big reductions in CO and cougar hunting will go away in a year or two, already a push for it.

This will bleed into WY and MT with time.

I don’t believe it’s just state land. It’s to reduce hunter/hiker conflict. Utah might have a goat hunt that has the same deal. Only allowed to hunt mid week like a few Colorado hunts.

I believe that has to do with ANILCA, but i could be incorrect. I don't live in Alaska and certainly wouldn't demand anything from them.

They mandate guides for certain species for non-residents, where's the outrage for that? Nope, just Wyoming.....

I believe that is the reason. But it’s one of many to shut hunting down on fed land since it’s such a tiny minority of Americans that hunt. And when most of those Americans hunt private land in the east I doubt it’s a very big deal when a couple units in AK get closed.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

and residents still complain they can kill anything because of the few NR that are allowed to come hunt.

I'm not complaining, i love hunting in Wyoming so much i rarely hunt outside of the state. No complaining from me. However, you are complaining a lot.

Again if Wyoming is so evil for placing a high value on its resources, go somewhere else. Obviously other states are better (more generous and cheaper), so do the intelligent thing and hunt there.