Wyoming Nonresident Proposed Changes

[unclericco]

The animals belong (actually held in trust for) to "the people" of the state they reside in.

As a NR you are only allowed access to our wildlife if we choose to let you have that access to them. If we feel like it, we can always allow you a 100-0 split of our wildlife resources.

This policy can also be reciprocated.

 

[Bobbyboe]

Because NR's have the region wide deer tags and NR's already get over 50% of the total pronghorn tags...no reason to have statute that isn't needed.

In general, I shy away from wildlife management via legislation and ballot box.

I’d tend to agree on how managing via legislation can be a handicap. I was just curious how one species tag allotment was addressed and not others.

 

[N2TRKYS]

The animals belong (actually held in trust for) to "the people" of the state they reside in.

As a NR you are only allowed access to our wildlife if we choose to let you have that access to them. If we feel like it, we can always allow you a 100-0 split of our wildlife resources.

I wish that federal tax dollars from outside of those States would be reflective of that same attitude and be cut accordingly.

 

[Lowndes]

IMO, the thing to keep in mind is that this whole NR hunting thing is a recent deal. I started hunting with a tag in my pocket in 1979. I hunted the State I lived in (Montana) and didn't hunt as a NR in any other state until 1995.

Also, when I started hunting there was no youth only season deer season in Montana that gave youth a 2-day head start. There was no shooting doe deer and cow elk all season long. There were very few b-tags for deer, no b-tags for elk. I hunted the same seasons as the rest of the hunters in Montana.

So, just because little johnnie doesn't get to hunt 5 states a year, I'm not seeing the doom and gloom. NR hunting is a pure luxury for all of us and IMO, too much emphasis is put on what you CANT do, than what you CAN do.

Lots of bird hunting, small game, and resident opportunity to get kids in the field...concentrate on those.

Actually hunting is a pure luxury for all of us (on public lands at least). Resident or non-resident it is certainly no federally granted constitutional right to be able to hunt. If you look back at they way the Supreme Court cases that allow for the current allocation of tags and fee structure it is pretty clear that was a big factor in the way those cases were decided. I'd be interested in how the current court would decide such a case.

And agree on small game, etc. I'm a newbie to the western hunting game but spend a good bit of time chasing squirrels, turkey, ducks and whitetail with my family. Most of these is spent outside of Texas where I reside as well. It doesn't really matter if somebody is hunting as a resident or nonresident in my opinion. Hopefully, people get out there and enjoy the outdoors, hunt, fish but there are other ways to do that than simply go after elk, etc. This goes for residents and nonresidents alike.

 

[NoWiser]

IMO, the thing to keep in mind is that this whole NR hunting thing is a recent deal. I started hunting with a tag in my pocket in 1979. I hunted the State I lived in (Montana) and didn't hunt as a NR in any other state until 1995.

Also, when I started hunting there was no youth only season deer season in Montana that gave youth a 2-day head start. There was no shooting doe deer and cow elk all season long. There were very few b-tags for deer, no b-tags for elk. I hunted the same seasons as the rest of the hunters in Montana.

So, just because little johnnie doesn't get to hunt 5 states a year, I'm not seeing the doom and gloom. NR hunting is a pure luxury for all of us and IMO, too much emphasis is put on what you CANT do, than what you CAN do.

Lots of bird hunting, small game, and resident opportunity to get kids in the field...concentrate on those.

You aren't wrong about any of that. No kid needs to hunt out west to get started. There are lots of grouse, squirrels, turkeys, and deer here for that. My post was thinking more along the lines of when he's grown up. I started hunting out of state in my late 20's and have been to some amazing places and have seen incredible things due to being able to hunt as a NR throughout the west. It's simply a bit depressing to think that he'll likely have a fraction of the opportunities that I have had. Nothing more, and nothing less.

It's also not lost on me that for decades MN had fairly abundant moose hunting opportunities with 0% of them allocated to NR hunters.

 

[Dos Perros]

The animals belong (actually held in trust for) to "the people" of the state they reside in.

As a NR you are only allowed access to our wildlife if we choose to let you have that access to them. If we feel like it, we can always allow you a 100-0 split of our wildlife resources.

I didn't say anything about R vs NR you dolt.

 

[Fatcamp]

First part is correct, not sure about the rest. NR allocation stays at 7,250. Less LQ tags = more general tags.

All the $1000 cow tags a boy could want.

 

[Fatcamp]

I know where I apply, and I'm smart enough to understand that 10% is less than 20%.

 

[Mike Islander]

What’s everyone’s thoughts on these proposed changes? Getting to be a rich mans sport unfortunately.

Elk (current $690 > new $800)
Deer (current $372 > new $550)
Antelope (current $324 > new $425)
Sheep (current $2,318 > new $3,000)
Goat (current $2,160 > new $2,500)
Moose (current $1,980 > new $2,500)
Bull bison (current $4,400 > new $5,500)

Non-resident Quota Moose (current 20% > new 10%)
Non-resident Quota Sheep, Goat (current 25% > new 10%)
Non-resident Quota Elk (current 16% > new 10%)
Non-resident Quota Deer/Antelope (current ~20% > new 10%)

*30% of all non-resident licenses reserved in a separate quota for those hunting with an outfitter. (aka guide draw)
*Special priced licenses/quota split would be discontinued.
*Hunts with 9 or less licenses would have 0 non-resident licenses.
*Non-resident application fee increased from $15 to $17

Wyoming SF0094 | 2020 | Budget Session

Summary (2020-02-12) Hunting licenses-resident and nonresident. [Failed Introduction 1-28-1-0-0]

legiscan.com

My thought is I am over Wyoming. I'll go where they are friendly to out of state hunters, or just enjoy the bountiful hunting we have here in SC. No elk, but deer, bear, predators, waterfowl, etc. Long seasons with liberal quotas. And pretty cheap licenses.

 

[brsnow]

The Kardashians move there and now they think they are royalty;-)

 

[Buckshot85]

You can stomp on me if it makes you feel better, doesn’t matter to me, but here’s my take.
I choose to enjoy my life and do my best to not let cost dictate my fun. If I want to hunt Wyoming, I’ll pay the fees, buy the points and hire guides, because that’s what I want. My income is not huge by anyone’s measure. I do what I can afford and if that means sacrificing other things, so be it.
I’d like to see reciprocity compacts between the states.Every state I hunt in outside of Wisconsin costs me dearly. Yet, NR can hunt whitetail here for like $165 for 2-3 tags, total, OTC.
I don’t enjoy paying more for less, but I do enjoy the hunt and will not stop.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

I disagree...people need to start doing some thinking and research on their own. Hunters and Fishermen have a real knack for thinking that buying a license is all they need to do. They think wildlife issues are only important for the time of the year they can be out running a hook or bullet through something. I'm here to say, if people don't start understanding what's going on and supporting each other and groups that fight on their behalf...its all over. Nobody should be relying on the same old group of people to do their bidding for them. For wayyyyy too long, wayyyyy too few have fought the good fight for the complacent majority.

Its that whole teaching a person to fish, rather than giving them a fish...thing.

So, my first post was to hopefully get a few to start digging around and trying to research on their own how these things impact them.

I don't mind clarifying and offering up my advice, opinions, etc. to help when I can. But, we need a more diverse and bigger group of people engaging in these issues or we're going to have a real problem in the near future.

I don’t disagree that more people need to get involved in fighting the good fight.

However being condescension to people, especially when you are in a leadership role in the hunting community is never the right answer. All that does is drive more people away.

I’m sorry I don’t have the time to stay current in the goings on with the Wyoming legislature, fish and game, and the outfitting association. I’m busy balancing a military and civilian career, a wife, and an infant son. I’m happy if I get two weeks to get my tag and go on a hunting trip, and do what I can to financially support organizations like BHA, RMEF, etc.

I appreciate your knowledge and passion, but I won’t tolerate when people talk down to other hunters. In my opinion we’ve got a problem in hunting culture of people not treating others with respect. We criticize other hunters for what weapon they use, how they hunt, their residency status, etc etc. Part of that is a social media problem, but it’s intolerable none the less, and I’ll call someone out when I see it, no matter their knowledge, experience, or status. It’s the one thing we can easily change that negatively affects recruitment and retention.

 

[isItFallYet]

The animals belong (actually held in trust for) to "the people" of the state they reside in.

As a NR you are only allowed access to our wildlife if we choose to let you have that access to them. If we feel like it, we can always allow you a 100-0 split of our wildlife resources.

I understand most of your logic, except the need for the statement above. As long as there are federal lands within a state, there should be federal opportunity to access it. I'm sure Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold would agree.

 

[Lowndes]

I understand most of your logic, except the need for the statement above. As long as there are federal lands within a state, there should be federal opportunity to access it. I'm sure Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold would agree.

I agree - it alienates people who are on the same side unnecessarily. The only reason residents of any state have access to federal lands to hunt is because the public in the other states allow for such hunting access. That right can certainly be taken away and I'm not overly optimistic that it will exist for the next generation.

Edit to add that I actually really don't have a problem with the caps and the resident/non-resident allocation(s). I think tags should be reduced all over the west (both resident and nonresident). It's the tone and attitude some posters have towards nonresidents (whose land they are hunting) that is very off putting.

 

[cmahoney]

I like the 10% non resident cap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[-bowfreak-]

I understand most of your logic, except the need for the statement above. As long as there are federal lands within a state, there should be federal opportunity to access it. I'm sure Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold would agree.

Maybe there should be but states hold the wildlife in trust for the people. They also set the rules for whoever can hunt in their state. They absolutely can legally shut NRs out of the picture completely.

Regardless of what anyone says, you will never see a 100-0 split. Residents in any western state would crap the bed if they were asked to make up the difference for the NR revenue loss. Granted, many would pay a significant increase to have the woods to themselves, but the average guy goes nuts over a $10 tag increase. 100-0 is never happening.

 

[KurtR]

I understand most of your logic, except the need for the statement above. As long as there are federal lands within a state, there should be federal opportunity to access it. I'm sure Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold would agree.

You can access the federal land all you want just cant shoot the states big game animals on it.

 

[805Bowhunter]

Sorry but this whole bill is lame. I get that stated dont owe NR anything...but this sucks. Wyoming has always had a great balance of game management, treatment of residents, and good opportunity for NR. Hopefully this doesnt pass. I will be making my voice heard shortly.

The part that bothers me the most is that I have two young children (3 and 5) and a wife whom I was just able to get into hunting. We hunted this past year in Wy on the gen for elk. I have, for the majority of my adult life, looked forward to hunting with my wife and kids. Because opportunity is shrinking across western states, it bums me out that there will simply be less opportunity for us to hunt as family. I understand that residents need to be taken care of first and foremost, I just want their to be a balance. Part of my bias is also built around the fact that I hunt in CA where hunting is already limited. I know I look at this skewed because I depend on out of state hunting for the overwhelming majority of big game hunting throughout the year. Wyoming has been very very generous to NR over the years, far more than most states (especially when you get a damn good hunt out of it), I just wish it would stay that way.

I feel that in some way, its watching your childhood bmx track get bulldozed to build homes. I know why it is happening and that it is "bound to happen sooner rather than later," it just still sucks. I have had so many insane hunts in Wy that I simply just dont want it to change.

 

[BuzzH]

I understand most of your logic, except the need for the statement above. As long as there are federal lands within a state, there should be federal opportunity to access it. I'm sure Teddy Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold would agree.

You can access federal lands all you want, Wyoming isn't telling you or anyone else they cant. But the State, via case law and Acts of Congress controls the wildlife and decides if we allow NR's to have access to that wildlife.

Land ownership has nothing to do with wildlife ownership.

 

[BuzzH]

I don’t disagree that more people need to get involved in fighting the good fight.

However being condescension to people, especially when you are in a leadership role in the hunting community is never the right answer. All that does is drive more people away.

I’m sorry I don’t have the time to stay current in the goings on with the Wyoming legislature, fish and game, and the outfitting association. I’m busy balancing a military and civilian career, a wife, and an infant son. I’m happy if I get two weeks to get my tag and go on a hunting trip, and do what I can to financially support organizations like BHA, RMEF, etc.

I appreciate your knowledge and passion, but I won’t tolerate when people talk down to other hunters. In my opinion we’ve got a problem in hunting culture of people not treating others with respect. We criticize other hunters for what weapon they use, how they hunt, their residency status, etc etc. Part of that is a social media problem, but it’s intolerable none the less, and I’ll call someone out when I see it, no matter their knowledge, experience, or status. It’s the one thing we can easily change that negatively affects recruitment and retention.

Oh, and I guess I'm not busy?

What I grow tired of is the excuses that people make for NOT getting involved. Throwing some money and support at organizations is great, I do that as well. Its much appreciated, but I find it troubling that on important issues that impact hunters and fisherman, hardly anyone ever shows up. If even 10% of the people that purchased a tag or fishing license spoke up, wrote a letter, made a phone call...good grief, we could accomplish things.

The reason I take the time to do these things is not because I'm comfortable doing it, its not because its convenient for me to do it, and its not like I really have the time. I make the time because those guys that came before me, they did the same thing. They sacrificed time away from their families, their other hobbies, their vacations, etc. so that I get to enjoy what we have now. The least I can do is spend some vacation time and a few hours a week advocating for what they fought for.

I don't believe for one second that all of us don't have some spare time to advocate for wildlife, public lands, habitat, etc. It doesn't have to be in Wyoming, It doesn't have to be every issue....there are a mountain of issues that need to be dealt with by locals with knowledge in just about every State.

I will agree that its a challenge to get all the information out there, but I think places like these bulletin boards are a great way to get information out and issues on the table.

I also believe at no time in history is there better information sharing and its never been easier to get involved. Yet, a vast majority still don't take the time to inform themselves or get involved.

That's not being condescending, that's just being factual.