Wyoming Nonresident Proposed Changes

[KurtR]

It wouldnt matter, there still arent enough residents in that state to kill enough to keep up. Hell, the majority dont even kill ONE elk per year right now.

I thought the wolves have already killed all the animals there?

 

[BuzzH]

Bold statement Buzz. I would really like to see how that would work out for Wyoming Wildlife. In less than 10 years, you would likely have major overpopulation issues. Not enough game could be killed by residents to keep them in check. Good luck on that one. Im sure you dont mean it, but its a ridiculous statement none the less.

Really?

Try to hunt moose in ND as a nonresident as a perfect example.

You really think there aren't enough WY residents to control the "major overpopulation" we have with sheep, moose, goat, and bison and keep them "in check"?

Don't bust your arm patting yourself on the back acting like you're doing us a favor by hunting here.

Nobody is recommending a 100-0 split, even the guy pushing this bill. But, that wasn't the point, which apparently you missed. The point is, in every state other than the one you live in, you hunt as a NR at the pleasure of the Residents of that state. If they decide to not allow a single NR tag to be issued, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.

 

[BuzzH]

It wouldnt matter, there still arent enough residents in that state to kill enough to keep up. Hell, the majority dont even kill ONE elk per year right now.

Some of us kill 3 each year...and would have no problem filling a lot more tags.

Elk hunters, like everything else in life...are not all created equally.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz:
If WWF and WOGA are against this bill, who in the state is for it? Some citizen with a legislator's ear had to get the ball rolling. I saw this last summer but Shaul's complaints about leftover tags (which seemed ridiculous to me) didn't make it into the bill.

Letter to the Editor-Rob Shaul

Why don't Wyoming hunters get preference for leftover tags?

www.rocketminer.com

I'm having a hard time seeing a Wyo resident NOT having elk hunting opportunity. They can hunt elk every single year. Besides the general license, the draw odds and quotas are pretty good for residents in most all of the LE areas. I hunt cow elk in probably the highest demand area for residents in the state and their odds are about 1 in 4 to draw to draw a bull tag with 1000+ tags issued to residents. Non residents get about 170 full price bull tags. Moving 8 or 9 of those tags isn't going to drastically change the odds for residents.

I'm probably wrong but I would guess that the resident complaints would center around General elk areas where a lot of residents hunt and the most non-resident tags (approx 3900) are given.

I generally agree with what you stated, but not your math. NR's get 16% of LQ tags, if they only received 10%, it would move a lot more than 8-9 tags to the resident draw in your example.

1000x.16= 160 1000x.10=100....to keep it simple.

 

[LostArra]

I generally agree with what you stated, but not your math. NR's get 16% of LQ tags, if they only received 10%, it would be a lot more than 8-9 tags to the resident draw in your example.

8-9 tags, I was just referring to bull tags in the area I hunt. Anyone (resident or non-resident) can draw a full price cow in that area.

 

[Steve O]

What is wrong with you people. The guy is telling you exactly how the law is written. It’s been taken to court and upheld many times. Don’t kill the messenger who is actually on your side..

I have a LOT to lose in Wyoming. So much so I let my wife know yesterday we may have to stop there for a couple years on the way to Arizona for retirement.

It would be to all NR benefit to work with and support Wyoming residents and groups like the Bowhunters of Wyoming that are a voice for all of us trying to enjoy the hunting opportunities there than attacking them ignorantly.

 

[NDGuy]

I thought the wolves have already killed all the animals there?

Breaking New Bill Passed by WY Legislature:
"Non-resident hunters to be replaced by importing wolves"

 

[KHNC]

Really?

Try to hunt moose in ND as a nonresident as a perfect example.

You really think there aren't enough WY residents to control the "major overpopulation" we have with sheep, moose, goat, and bison and keep them "in check"?

Don't bust your arm patting yourself on the back acting like you're doing us a favor by hunting here.

Nobody is recommending a 100-0 split, even the guy pushing this bill. But, that wasn't the point, which apparently you missed. The point is, in every state other than the one you live in, you hunt as a NR at the pleasure of the Residents of that state. If they decide to not allow a single NR tag to be issued, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.

Well, i am referring to elk and deer. You damn sure cant kill enough of them with residents only. You are seriously trying to claim that Wyoming residents ONLY could kill enough elk and deer EVERY year to control the entire population of the state? Only about 70,000 of your residents even buy a hunting license at all. What is the success rate? Mayby 20-30% now? So , maybe 10-15,000 elk killed by residents? SO , yall could triple that all of a sudden? And sustain it year after year? Like i said, its a ridiculous statement. Without NR's , YOU CAN NOT control the game population. Especially once you have eliminated all of the NR revenue coming into the state. Do yourself a favor and stick to facts instead of blasting off at the mouth about eliminating NR opportunities "if we feel like it" . All NR's appreciate the opportunity to hunt wyoming. No need to make comments like that one.

 

[KHNC]

Breaking New Bill Passed by WY Legislature:
"Non-resident hunters to be replaced by importing wolves"

Considering estimates put wolves killing 10-11,000 elk per year , in some areas, this may work. Lol

 

[cnelk]

Without NR's , YOU CAN NOT control the game population WFG Budget.

Fixed it for you

 

[BrentH]

In general terms, there will be NO significant loss of D, E, A tags for NR's in regard to 90-10 split.

It is a fact that in Statute, NR's are assured 7,250 full price elk tags...meaning the 6% decrease in LQ tags to NR's would be made up for with more general tags. So, that's a wash. The same with LQ cow/calf tags, what residents don't draw right now, are headed to the leftover draw, so NR's wouldn't see any significant decrease there.

A vast majority of the NR deer tags are region wide tags, those are 100% going to NR's. There will be a decrease in the remaining LQ deer tags to NR's, no question of that, you're losing 10% of those tags and no way to off-set unless areas are undersubscribed by Residents (those fall to the NR initial draw).

Pronghorn is going to see a shift. No question the harder to draw areas would be tougher for NR's to draw, you're losing 10% of your quota. But, there will also be tags available in mid-tier units where Residents wont now draw tags due to the 10% increase in Resident tags being drawn in different unit. Currently, NR's draw more than 50% of the pronghorn tags in Wyoming, that wont change with a 90-10 split. Its going to be more of a shift in where NR tags are more available, than a loss in total NR pronghorn tags.

Sheep, moose, goat, bison...you're again flat losing those tags by 10-15% depending on the species.

Can you point me to the statute that calls out the 7,250 Elk tags? I’m not turning it up. Thanks.

 

[Lowndes]

Fixed it for you

I think it is more than that. I’m sure the Wyoming residents would do a fine job controlling the population and be willing to step up to the plate to do so. The cost of tags is also minimal compared to the impact on local businesses, etc. For example, I just booked a trip to Idaho with an outfitter and if I added up the total amount that I will spend in state on outfitter, transportation, butcher (hopefully), etc. it will be around $10k. The costs of tags is only about 7.5% of that number.

I understand most don't go the outfitter route so that number is high but tourism in a lot of these states is a big factor in the employment of residents, etc.

 

[BuzzH]

Can you point me to the statute that calls out the 7,250 Elk tags? I’m not turning it up. Thanks.

Chapter 44:




Section 1. Authority. This regulation is promulgated by authority of Wyoming Statutes § 6-7-101, § 9-4-217(h), § 20-6-112, § 23-1-107, § 23-1-302, § 23-1-702, § 23-1-703, § 23-1-704, § 23-1-705, § 23-2-101, § 23-2-102, § 23-2-107, § 23-2-109, § 23-2-201, § 23-2-207, § 23-2-301, § 23-2-306, § 23-2-307, § 23-2-401 and § 23-3-403, § 23-6-301 through § 23-6-303.

(iv) Elk. A total license limit of seven thousand two hundred-fifty (7,250) nonresident elk licenses shall be made available to nonresident applicants in the initial drawing each year.

 

[BuzzH]

Well, i am referring to elk and deer. You damn sure cant kill enough of them with residents only. You are seriously trying to claim that Wyoming residents ONLY could kill enough elk and deer EVERY year to control the entire population of the state? Only about 70,000 of your residents even buy a hunting license at all. What is the success rate? Mayby 20-30% now? So , maybe 10-15,000 elk killed by residents? SO , yall could triple that all of a sudden? And sustain it year after year? Like i said, its a ridiculous statement. Without NR's , YOU CAN NOT control the game population. Especially once you have eliminated all of the NR revenue coming into the state. Do yourself a favor and stick to facts instead of blasting off at the mouth about eliminating NR opportunities "if we feel like it" . All NR's appreciate the opportunity to hunt wyoming. No need to make comments like that one.

Instead of pulling numbers out of your...wherever it is you pull numbers from.

In 2018, Resident elk hunter success was 42.9% with 19,020 elk taken...

Like I said, not all elk hunters are created equally and WY has some of the best.

 

[isItFallYet]

There is federal opportunity you can, camp, hike recreate on all federal land till the cows come home but the states manage the resources and hold in trust for the residents of that state

If they decide to not allow a single NR tag to be issued, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.
[/QUOTE]

If WY did do this, which they won't, there are things that can be done. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the US Constitution states that Congress has authority of the 640 million acres of federal land. It would take some lobbying and votes, but I'm sure that there would be repercussions. Again, NRs like myself appreciate the hunting opportunities in your state(s). As much as NRs should appreciate the opportunities, residents should realize the economic advantages of NRs. ...the G&F depts do, obviously.

 

[SummitsCalling]

. If they decide to not allow a single NR tag to be issued, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.

You do alot of great, and I do enjoy your posts regarding the insights you have. However, I would have to disagree with this statement but I do understand the point you were trying to make so I will make one as well.

I offer this up, Wait until Joe schmo goes and buys his annual general tag at the local hardware store and realizes it now costs $1k+ because NR are no longer contributing. We NR couldn't do anything, but the R of WY would. Heck, I'm even for a 100-0 split to watch the recipication that would occur from several states just to see F&G beg NR to come back once the common uninformed R realises how budgets are made.

But just like your comment, we all know that won't happen. If anything, You ask sportsman to get involved and voice their concerns, I think based on this thread and on several other forums, the drum beating gohunt as well started, you should be happy.

 

[BuzzH]

If they decide to not allow a single NR tag to be issued, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.

If WY did do this, which they won't, there are things that can be done. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the US Constitution states that Congress has authority of the 640 million acres of federal land. It would take some lobbying and votes, but I'm sure that there would be repercussions. Again, NRs like myself appreciate the hunting opportunities in your state(s). As much as NRs should appreciate the opportunities, residents should realize the economic advantages of NRs. ...the G&F depts do, obviously.
[/QUOTE]

Nope, as a NR you still have NO authority over how WY manages their game. For the 100th time...land ownership and wildlife ownership ARE mutually exclusive of one another.

I've already given examples where NR's are not offered a single NR tag. North Dakota moose, South Dakota Mountain Goat, Rocky Mountain Bighorn sheep in Nevada....to name a few.

What "repercussions" are happening to Nevada, South Dakota and North Dakota?

 

[isItFallYet]

If WY did do this, which they won't, there are things that can be done. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the US Constitution states that Congress has authority of the 640 million acres of federal land. It would take some lobbying and votes, but I'm sure that there would be repercussions. Again, NRs like myself appreciate the hunting opportunities in your state(s). As much as NRs should appreciate the opportunities, residents should realize the economic advantages of NRs. ...the G&F depts do, obviously.

Nope, as a NR you still have NO authority over how WY manages their game. For the 100th time...land ownership and wildlife ownership ARE mutually exclusive of one another.

I've already given examples where NR's are not offered a single NR tag. North Dakota moose, South Dakota Mountain Goat, Rocky Mountain Bighorn sheep in Nevada....to name a few.

What "repercussions" are happening to Nevada, South Dakota and North Dakota?
[/QUOTE]

Touche. Nobody cares about the Dakotas or Nevada, we still have WY, MT, CO, and ID.

 

[BuzzH]

You do alot of great, and I do enjoy your posts regarding the insights you have. However, I would have to disagree with this statement but I do understand the point you were trying to make so I will make one as well.

I offer this up, Wait until Joe schmo goes and buys his annual general tag at the local hardware store and realizes it now costs $1k+ because NR are no longer contributing. We NR couldn't do anything, but the R of WY would. Heck, I'm even for a 100-0 split to watch the recipication that would occur from several states just to see F&G beg NR to come back once the common uninformed R realises how budgets are made.

But just like your comment, we all know that won't happen. If anything, You ask sportsman to get involved and voice their concerns, I think based on this thread and on several other forums, the drum beating gohunt as well started, you should be happy.

Coffee is burnt...time to wake up, its codified in Federal Law:

S. 339

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and
fishing activities.


_______________________________________________________________________


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 9, 2005

Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska,
Mr. Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Salazar,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Kyl) introduced the
following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on
the Judiciary

April 21, 2005

Reported by Mr. Specter, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL



To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and
fishing activities.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Reaffirmation of State Regulation of
Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL
SILENCE.

(a) In General.--It is the policy of Congress that it is in the
public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for
any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries, including by
means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and
nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses
or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the
kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees
charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting
or fishing.
(b) Construction of Congressional Silence.--Silence on the part of
Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier under clause 3 of
Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the
``commerce clause'') to the regulation of hunting or fishing by a State
or Indian tribe.

SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
(1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law
related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife or
to the regulation of commerce;
(2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit
hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the
United States; or
(3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or
alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian
tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not
limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive
Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.

SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.

For purposes of this Act, the term ``State'' includes the several
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.




Calendar No. 85

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 339

 

[Muley Buck]

Instead of pulling numbers out of your...wherever it is you pull numbers from.

In 2018, Resident elk hunter success was 42.9% with 19,020 elk taken...

Like I said, not all elk hunters are created equally and WY has some of the best.

Not to mention that season dates would / could probably be much wider and longer in order to reach the management goals.

Ya I'm sure residents of Wyoming would be crying, wondering how they are going to fill 10 elk, 10 deer and 10 antelope tags in a 4 month season.