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

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

you can try to spin it anyway ya want but those hwy funds, taxes and other junk have absolutely nothing to do with hunting or monies to F&G.

I'm not spinning anything, and I never said those hwy funds and taxes had anything to do with hunting or F&G funding. My point and opinion is that R live there 365 and earn/deserve priority over NR when it comes to tag allocation. They pay for the roads, maintenance, infrastructure, and keep the businesses open for you to patronize a few days per year.

Ya said the magic word though "PUBLIC". If people do not like the way state tags are ran and public land hunters they need to buy property and quit wanking.

I literally already said that to you. TBH, with your comments I can't determine what your position is. Are you bitching about not having a voice on NR tag allocation or not?

Pretty easy solution. Iowa has over 680k acres of public land according to the computer. I know where to pheasant hunt there, got a few buddys there...

Wow, sounds like a lot when you say it that way. To provide a little more context for you and your computer, there are over 35M acres in my native state with more than 30M farmed. Of this 30M, over 26M are dedicated to row crop. You aren't going to find anybody R or NR that is going to tout Iowa and it's public land opportunities.

If someone was offended by me stating a fact about their taxes they pretty lame. No different than me paying taxes here, it has absolutely nothing to do with hunting or non-res hunters.

You've completely missed the point. You're dismissing the fact that R should be entitled to higher priorities when it comes to tag allocation, even though they live, breathe, and spend their money there 365 days per year. You've likely also offended folks by stating that 99% of R don't do anything as stewards of the land.

When was the last time you picked up somebody else's trash at a trailhead, fishing spot, etc... You're coming off as the exact type of entitled NR that give the rest of us a bad reputation.

 

[dirtytough]

I gotta say. I don’t think people who don’t live in the state should get a voice on how game is managed. NR hunting is a gift.

Kinda like how people who don’t hunt or live in the west should not get a voice on restricting wolf and bear hunting.

Why? 99% of the animals wolves eat are living off of federal land. If people want wolves running around on land they help pay for I see zero issue with it.


OP it’s really not worth worrying about. One of the only ways I can see a difference happening is money. Now the states are going to keep charging. But if every hunter from the Midwest to the east coast quit donating to their favorite con org, it might help. A note saying you can’t afford to donate and keep paying more and more for tags would help.

And if you think about it why should you pay for the play ground equipment you aren’t allowed to use? You pay for the playground already.


And I would make sure to do a whack and stack when you do get tags. Make it worth your time. Doe/cow tags are usually cheap.

 

[KurtR]

Out of state people having a voice is what got the whole wolf thing started so theres that.

 

[Scoot]

There were two voices for NR in WY, Outfitters who care about legislation that benefits a hunter that would be paying for their services, and a cpl residents that didn't like seeing nr getting shafted by that one sided legislation. The residents still do some work for nr but don't talk about it much.
Who you support depends on how you hunt, outfitted or diy.

Yep. The outfitters really don't support anything beyond their self-interests... What the outfitters are doing in MT and WY is sad and an outright assault on DIY hunting. ...and the Rs of all the states don't give a damn because it doesn't impact them. Special privileges and welfare tags seems to be the way of the future because the outfitter's associations are in bed with the politicians and the people who can influence things do nothing because they're not getting screwed. The future of hunting looks bleak...

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

And I would make sure to do a whack and stack when you do get tags. Make it worth your time. Doe/cow tags are usually cheap.

For sure, go in there resenting the locals with an "exploitation" type attitude. That sounds like a great approach, trying to justify your time and money vs. simply appreciating the opportunity. Gee whiz man...

 

[Kodiak06]

I'm not spinning anything, and I never said those hwy funds and taxes had anything to do with hunting or F&G funding. My point and opinion is that R live there 365 and earn/deserve priority over NR when it comes to tag allocation. They pay for the roads, maintenance, infrastructure, and keep the businesses open for you to patronize a few days per year.

I literally already said that to you. TBH, with your comments I can't determine what your position is. Are you bitching about not having a voice on NR tag allocation or not?

Wow, sounds like a lot when you say it that way. To provide a little more context for you and your computer, there are over 35M acres in my native state with more than 30M farmed. Of this 30M, over 26M are dedicated to row crop. You aren't going to find anybody R or NR that is going to tout Iowa and it's public land opportunities.

You've completely missed the point. You're dismissing the fact that R should be entitled to higher priorities when it comes to tag allocation, even though they live, breathe, and spend their money there 365 days per year. You've likely also offended folks by stating that 99% of R don't do anything as stewards of the land.

When was the last time you picked up somebody else's trash at a trailhead, fishing spot, etc... You're coming off as the exact type of entitled NR that give the rest of us a bad reputation.

LMAO, Funny ya talking crap and calling me an entitled NR and then ya wanking saying that I offended someone. I served 28yrs, I'm thick skinned I'm not offended at all. NOTHING I've said pertained to NR getting an entitlement or perk over residents. It's obvious that residents get more of a priority over hunt tags and I never said they should not. I replied to your comment that "ALL" residents should get a tag before a non-res and that's BS.

You haven't saw a post with me saying NR should have a say because It's silly to think a non-res should have a say IMO and never commented.

If you so worried about people being offended why are you making such ignorant comments to me? Without knowing a thing about me you ASSumed some imaginary BS and started wanking like your feelings got hurt telling me I'm a bad example of a NR lol. You sound like a Biden fan boy with ya bullmess.

FYI, I picked up garbage in Idaho a few times when I hunted there for two weeks, I drug carcasses away from gates because it looks like crap. I do the same in Washington and Oregon, I'm in the woods pretty much year 'round. I manage damage tags for cow elk for Veterans, DAV, and civilians. Not that it's any of your business but any deer I shot in Idaho was/did go to a food bank lol. I'm really a poor example. I'm done with you and your assumptions. Happy hunting

 

[TVW]

LMAO, Funny ya talking crap and calling me an entitled NR and then ya wanking saying that I offended someone. I served 28yrs, I'm thick skinned I'm not offended at all. NOTHING I've said pertained to NR getting an entitlement or perk over residents. It's obvious that residents get more of a priority over hunt tags and I never said they should not. I replied to your comment that "ALL" residents should get a tag before a non-res and that's BS.

You haven't saw a post with me saying NR should have a say because It's silly to think a non-res should have a say IMO and never commented.

If you so worried about people being offended why are you making such ignorant comments to me? Without knowing a thing about me you ASSumed some imaginary BS and started wanking like your feelings got hurt telling me I'm a bad example of a NR lol. You sound like a Biden fan boy with ya bullmess.

FYI, I picked up garbage in Idaho a few times when I hunted there for two weeks, I drug carcasses away from gates because it looks like crap. I do the same in Washington and Oregon, I'm in the woods pretty much year 'round. I manage damage tags for cow elk for Veterans, DAV, and civilians. Not that it's any of your business but any deer I shot in Idaho was/did go to a food bank lol. I'm really a poor example. I'm done with you and your assumptions. Happy hunting

I've always failed to see how someone can act like a hero for shooting so many animals they don't need anymore meat and then donating the rest to charity....maybe just stop shooting stuff when the freezer is full?

But I guess that doesn't get the content for social media and bragging rights huh?

 

[Kodiak06]

I've always failed to see how someone can act like a hero for shooting so many animals they don't need anymore meat and then donating the rest to charity....maybe just stop shooting stuff when the freezer is full?

But I guess that doesn't get the content for social media and bragging rights huh?

No one's acted like a hero, man some of you are funny. FYI, I rarely post my kills to social media or brag, I guess the reason I posted it was over your head OR ya failed to read what I replied to. I've hunted 53yrs, nothing to brag about other than being blessed to do it. I had TWO tags, $760, plus license, plus 600 miles travel, and other expenses, Came home with a tag even though I could have been a hero and killed a doe/small buck just for the fun of it lol. If you feel donating meat to a food bank is a bad thing I hope you're never hungry...

Quick question, Did I say how many animals I shot this year or mention my freezer? lol

 

[kpk]

This is the type of dumpster fire conversation that makes hunters resent other hunters.

One thing I noticed (that I wasn't expecting) while reading through one of the task force's "final reports" was that there are herds/areas that they consider to be over population goals, and declining hunter numbers overall. They have the unfortunate task of addressing those issues.

I looked about a month ago at leftover licenses - there were a pile of them - and there still are as of right now. Now, we understand it's inaccessible private, or they migrate through, or whatever.....but the people writing regulations and voting often don't know or don't even care they simply listen to who yells the loudest.

Residents and Non-resident both need to remember it's not necessarily between us, we're just the ones stuck in the middle between outfitters, ranches/farmers, insurance companies, etc and they don't care about us.

I've hunted Wyoming numerous times and will continue as long as there is hope of drawing tags eventually. Every one I have ever talked to in Wyoming has been awesome and helpful - from hunters to restaurants and VRBOS. I just wish I could hunt wilderness areas w/o a hiring a guide.

 

[MattB]

My point is you cannot prevent non-res from hunting as long as there's public land lol.

That statement is not true, and there is a rich history of case law that supports that it is not true.

EDIT: the legal concept your position ignores is known as the Public Trust Doctrine, the result of which is essentially the following: “Most states use trust or trust-like language in proclaiming their “sovereign ownership” of wildlife, meaning that wildlife must be managed in the public interest for state citizens.” Note it does not reference non-residents or land ownership.

 

[dirtytough]

For sure, go in there resenting the locals with an "exploitation" type attitude. That sounds like a great approach, trying to justify your time and money vs. simply appreciating the opportunity. Gee whiz man...

The bios set the quotas. The person that hires the bios is put in place by the governor usually. The governor is voted in by the residents.

I feel fine filling tags that the residents essentially approved.

I’m not going to walk on tip toes because some greedy residents might get offended.

 

[LostArra]

If someone doesn't like the Wyoming elk tag system then give Colorado a try. It sounds like a popular alternative with the largest elk herd in America and the CWP greets non residents with open arms. (You can even hunt wilderness areas without a guide!)

 

[Gutshot007]

Can we just sell all the federal land to wealthy californians for wolf sanctuaries and be done with it. Then shoot all the excess "superherd" elk on private land from helicopters leaving carcasses to rot for coyote bait . Cows only of course . Leaving bull tags to the outfitters to sell to the highest bidder. Its because the cow elk are eating the poor ranchers alfalfa. After all elk are a limited resource with only so many tags to go around . Theres the " shut up and send money for points" indefinitely philosophy ( get your priorities straight). Or a guy could pick up his family and move there option . Theres no state income tax.the state owns the animal. Blah blah blah. Just having flashbacks of previous threads . OP i would dig around and look at previous threads might be quite entertaining. Good luck

 

[Rich M]

Any constructive comments ?

Did you miss the 90/10 stuff on here?
They came up with this as a compromise somehow.
It aint over yet.

Ugly stuff.
Brings out ugly in people - that 90/10 crap came out and all the uglies with it.

 

[Kodiak06]

That statement is not true, and there is a rich history of case law that supports that it is not true.

EDIT: the legal concept your position ignores is known as the Public Trust Doctrine, the result of which is essentially the following: “Most states use trust or trust-like language in proclaiming their “sovereign ownership” of wildlife, meaning that wildlife must be managed in the public interest for state citizens.” Note it does not reference non-residents or land ownership.

I don't know of a single state that has banned ALL non-res hunters... I think you miss interpreted what I was saying.

 

[MattB]

I don't know of a single state that has banned ALL non-res hunters... I think you miss interpreted what I was saying.

States could eliminate non-resident hunting (meaning, there is no requirement that states allow non-resident hunters) and some state do not allow non-residents to hunt certain game species. But most importantly, it has nothing to do with whether public land exists in a state.

 

[Kodiak06]

States could eliminate non-resident hunting (meaning, there is no requirement that states allow non-resident hunters) and some state do not allow non-residents to hunt certain game species. But most importantly, it has nothing to do with whether public land exists in a state.

Maybe so, but common sense says they won't due to the enormous revenue loss. Just in Idaho non-res pump in over 40% of the F&G revenue... Residents would love absorbing that cost.

 

[MattB]

Maybe so, but common sense says they won't due to the enormous revenue loss. Just in Idaho non-res pump in over 40% of the F&G revenue... Residents would love absorbing that cost.

Common sense says they won’t, but you said they can’t.

 

[280ack]

That may be, but you have a choice in what states you apply for tags. IMO, all things aren't equal when it comes to big game hunting, and R should always be priority and have a reasonable advantage over NR for general tags. For the more expensive LE tags, I could see NR getting additional priority if willing to spend double or triple.

i would be happy if it was double or triple the cost but at 2k its 38x a resident gen tag price

 

[Kodiak06]

Common sense says they won’t, but you said they can’t.

I don't think they can afford to lol. IF a state decided to stop ALL non-res hunting
*the residents couldn't make up the financial difference
*Surrounding state would more than likely ban that states residents for NR tags
*pretty sure that federal land in that state would have nonres hunters on it after some lawsuits and cut federal fundings