Wyoming shed hunting update

[Baddog]

Right. They are declaring that sheds are now considered wildlife......even though they never have been historically, nor logically should they have been. But this is the only way they can gain control over people picking up sheds, because if they aren't declared wildlife then they don't have control over that. So the FS could also now declare pine cones to be trees and issue permits to collect pine cones. It's always about the money......and control.

Well the FS does require a permit to pick up pine cones on the ground if it’s for a commercial use like building Christmas wreaths or something similar. No permit needed if you want a couple to take home.
But the government regulates picking up of rocks, flowers, firewood, etc…. So it’s just them extending the reach and tightening the noose a little more on you.

 

[3325]

HB 123 passed the Wyoming Senate and is headed to the governor’s desk.

If it becomes law it will go into effect July 1, so this year may be the last year for shed hunting as usual.

 

[mntnguide]

HB 123 passed the Wyoming Senate and is headed to the governor’s desk.

If it becomes law it will go into effect July 1, so this year may be the last year for shed hunting as usual.

It was also amended by the senate to now be a full 7 days instead of 3 for residents. Might be more fun next year to turn in flat brimmers breaking the law so they lose their hunting privileges for a year and don't have anything to post to insta, than it will be to find sheds!

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

 

[ewade07]

How is this going to be policed/enforced? Is there going to be wardens out there checking your ID? If so, I imagine the number of fake WY IDs is going to sky rocket

 

[mntnguide]

How is this going to be policed/enforced? Is there going to be wardens out there checking your ID? If so, I imagine the number of fake WY IDs is going to sky rocket

HB 276 also passed, which requires non-residents to purchase a conservation stamp in order to be shed hunting, which is no different than a fishing license and you must have a sportsman ID that is tied to your residency and address in order to get one..I hope a bunch of NR decide its worth breaking the law for, cause every case i know of involving breaking the current may 1 shed rule has resulted in at least a year of hunting license suspension which would involve you losing privileges in all states part of the compact. Is a shed worth not hunting anywhere for a year? guess we will see if the governor signs it into law

 

[ewade07]

HB 276 also passed, which requires non-residents to purchase a conservation stamp in order to be shed hunting, which is no different than a fishing license and you must have a sportsman ID that is tied to your residency and address in order to get one..I hope a bunch of NR decide its worth breaking the law for, cause every case i know of involving breaking the current may 1 shed rule has resulted in at least a year of hunting license suspension which would involve you losing privileges in all states part of the compact. Is a shed worth not hunting anywhere for a year? guess we will see if the governor signs it into law

I shed hunt in WY and have 0 complaints about getting the conservation license. Twenty bucks isnt a big deal. One would have to be a fool to not get it. The risks far outweigh the reward.

 

[3325]

Might be more fun next year to turn in flat brimmers breaking the law so they lose their hunting privileges for a year and don't have anything to post to insta, than it will be to find sheds!

Ha! So the new activity for some residents won’t be shed hunting but hunting illegal shed hunters? I might start participating.

 

[3325]

HB 276 also passed, which requires non-residents to purchase a conservation stamp in order to be shed hunting…….

I thought it required everyone to have a conservation stamp? It would mostly affect NRs because most residents already had one.

 

[Sccritterkiller]

Right. They are declaring that sheds are now considered wildlife......even though they never have been historically, nor logically should they have been. But this is the only way they can gain control over people picking up sheds, because if they aren't declared wildlife then they don't have control over that. So the FS could also now declare pine cones to be trees and issue permits to collect pine cones. It's always about the money......and control.

FS issues permits for firewood, pine cones, ect all the time depending on the amount taken..In the Santa Fe NF you have to have permit and can only pick up moss rock/flagstone in certain designated areas. You are limited to bushel of Pinon nuts before a permit is required. Usually under Forest Product permits on the website.
I dont shed hunt..crappie bite is too good that time of year.

 

[ewade07]

so did both of these bills pass?

 

[ewade07]

any updates? i see Idaho is now looking to implement a shed season as well......

 

[HiMtnHntr]

Wyoming Game and Fish Department - Several new laws will have an impact on wildlife and hunting

wgfd.wyo.gov

 

[ewade07]

Famous Wyoming Antler Hunt Might Be Delayed 2023

Not a good time for humans to be out there.

kisscasper.com

 

[MTtrout]

I can see why people don’t want to pay for something as simple as picking up sheds. The point I think is missed is that the money goes back into the WY fish and game pocket not the states general fund (please correct me if I’m wrong). That is a good thing. The boom of early shed hunting is out real. I respect states that are trying to give the animals some breathing room whether or not the language is funny.

 

[BigBull777]

I’ve thought a lot about Wyoming’s new shed antler law. What an absolute terrible precedence and direct blow to the N American model of conservation. The state of Wyoming first claimed ownership of shed antlers so they could regulate NR ability to hunt for them on their public land. Understand this has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the living wildlife as the area impacted is already closed to everyone until May 1. Instead it was written simply to give residents a 7 day advantage for shed hunting. In essence, WY legislature and Gov equated shed antlers with “wildlife” and claimed jurisdiction under game and fish, really no different than they do for other wildife.

Except here’s the kicker-
This law specifically exempts private land. Instead it makes it clear that sheds on private land are property of the landowner and they can restrict or allow harvest of antlers (Wyoming’s newest wildlife species) as they see fit. I seem to remember a lot of big landowners that have been making that very case for a long time advocating for private ownership of the elk and deer that migrate through their lands. It’s always been a hard pass… remember the public wildlife/private land tenant? I bet big landowners are thrilled with this new law and the precedent that it sets. Should be a lot easier to finally get ownership of “their” wildlife once and for all. Isn’t it also real interesting that we haven’t heard a late much as a peep out of the groups that are supposed to represent this great model for wildlife management? I would have guessed they would be outraged.

 

[ewade07]

I’ve thought a lot about Wyoming’s new shed antler law. What an absolute terrible precedence and direct blow to the N American model of conservation. The state of Wyoming first claimed ownership of shed antlers so they could regulate NR ability to hunt for them on their public land. Understand this has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the living wildlife as the area impacted is already closed to everyone until May 1. Instead it was written simply to give residents a 7 day advantage for shed hunting. In essence, WY legislature and Gov equated shed antlers with “wildlife” and claimed jurisdiction under game and fish, really no different than they do for other wildife.

Except here’s the kicker-
This law specifically exempts private land. Instead it makes it clear that sheds on private land are property of the landowner and they can restrict or allow harvest of antlers (Wyoming’s newest wildlife species) as they see fit. I seem to remember a lot of big landowners that have been making that very case for a long time advocating for private ownership of the elk and deer that migrate through their lands. It’s always been a hard pass… remember the public wildlife/private land tenant? I bet big landowners are thrilled with this new law and the precedent that it sets. Should be a lot easier to finally get ownership of “their” wildlife once and for all. Isn’t it also real interesting that we haven’t heard a late much as a peep out of the groups that are supposed to represent this great model for wildlife management? I would have guessed they would be outraged.

thats the way i see it, theres already a closure until may 1st. they just did it to give te residents a weeks head start. ridiculous.

 

[S.Clancy]

I’ve thought a lot about Wyoming’s new shed antler law. What an absolute terrible precedence and direct blow to the N American model of conservation. The state of Wyoming first claimed ownership of shed antlers so they could regulate NR ability to hunt for them on their public land. Understand this has absolutely nothing to do with protecting the living wildlife as the area impacted is already closed to everyone until May 1. Instead it was written simply to give residents a 7 day advantage for shed hunting. In essence, WY legislature and Gov equated shed antlers with “wildlife” and claimed jurisdiction under game and fish, really no different than they do for other wildife.

Except here’s the kicker-
This law specifically exempts private land. Instead it makes it clear that sheds on private land are property of the landowner and they can restrict or allow harvest of antlers (Wyoming’s newest wildlife species) as they see fit. I seem to remember a lot of big landowners that have been making that very case for a long time advocating for private ownership of the elk and deer that migrate through their lands. It’s always been a hard pass… remember the public wildlife/private land tenant? I bet big landowners are thrilled with this new law and the precedent that it sets. Should be a lot easier to finally get ownership of “their” wildlife once and for all. Isn’t it also real interesting that we haven’t heard a late much as a peep out of the groups that are supposed to represent this great model for wildlife management? I would have guessed they would be outraged.

Sheds aren't wildlife, simple evidence would be that you can sell them, unlike any other wildlife parts. That precedent has been there for a long time. Your second paragraph doesn't make any sense given how antlers have been treated for the past, well ever.

I have shed hunted in WY a lot (MT resident). I have personally had residents physically confront me for "working too hard" for sheds...whatever that means. We were very successful. I do understand why WY residents want this bill, especially on the western border with UT. I don't see how it is enforceable on federal lands, but on the state owned WMA's they can do whatever they want. If you actually want to blame someone, blame Utah-based shed-fluencers whose only use to the earth is either working for a credit card collection company or making videos....

 

[BRTreedogs]

Sheds aren't wildlife, simple evidence would be that you can sell them, unlike any other wildlife parts. That precedent has been there for a long time. Your second paragraph doesn't make any sense given how antlers have been treated for the past, well ever.

I have shed hunted in WY a lot (MT resident). I have personally had residents physically confront me for "working too hard" for sheds...whatever that means. We were very successful. I do understand why WY residents want this bill, especially on the western border with UT. I don't see how it is enforceable on federal lands, but on the state owned WMA's they can do whatever they want. If you actually want to blame someone, blame Utah-based shed-fluencers whose only use to the earth is either working for a credit card collection company or making videos....

You can sell hides and mounts rite?

I've seen alot of claims on various threads that you can't sell any wildlife parts except sheds. There fore sheds are not wildlife.

But non furbearer hides can and are sold all the time.
Same with finished taxidermy.

 

[S.Clancy]

You can sell hides and mounts rite?

I've seen alot of claims on various threads that you can't sell any wildlife parts except sheds. There fore sheds are not wildlife.

But non furbearer hides can and are sold all the time.
Same with finished taxidermy.

Correct. Parts is organs, meat, etc. My point is all that has been classified that way for a long time, so this is setting no precedent.

Why was it classified that way, I have no idea. Probably because the demand was for organs and meat and not elk hide and antlers. No one gave a shit about antlers until fairly recently, at least from a buying perspective.

 

[BRTreedogs]

My problem with a permit is remembering to buy it. Its spring I'm not in that mode yet.

I've had to let coyotes and even a lion walk in January because as I has started applying pressure to the Trigger I remembered I hadn't bought a new license for that year yet.

When are these states gonna implement automatic renewal? So it just hits your card Jan 1 for a license, lion tag, shed permit?