Wyoming’s Wilderness Area Nonresident Restrictions

[Spiral Horn]

Wyoming offers more NR Sheep tags than any other state, and has some great hunting opportunities. I’ve taken a few very nice archery Mule Deer there.

As far as the NR draw goes - it sucks that it can take 20 years or more to draw prime elk units in some western states, but that’s the way it is. If I’d known it would come that (only took 5 years when I started applying) I probably would have saved my coins, bought a landowner tag and have already hunted. But like a lot of folks I’m too deeply invested now. Setting NR prices and opportunities are a politician’s dream - able to levy fees and restrictions at will against folks with no political voice.

Understand that it can be frustrating for residents as well - waiting multiple years to hunt where you live. But residents can muster some effort to impact the system where they live.

 

[S.Clancy]

You are really going to compare WY to AK. I would feel very comfortable hunting WY backcountry solo. AK is a totally different animal. MT doesn’t block nonresidents from hunting their most rugged lands and I don’t think that there are very many incidents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, because they both do it under the guise of safety. I could do a fly in float out moose hunt but not a drop camp sheep hunt, both of those have their risks. WY is more egregious, but fundamentally not different in my opinion.

 

[Jake Larsen]

Wyoming offers more NR Sheep tags than any other state, and has some great hunting opportunities. I’ve taken a few very nice archery Mule Deer there.

As far as the NR draw goes - it sucks that it can take 20 years or more to draw prime elk units in some western states, but that’s the way it is. If I’d known it would come that (only took 5 years when I started applying) I probably would have saved my coins, bought a landowner tag and have already hunted. But like a lot of folks I’m too deeply invested now.

Take a look at the 3 point type units man. There's some amazing hunts with good chances of killing big bulls in those units. Especially when you consider your odds over the course of 15 or 20 years. You could hunt a good unit 4 or 5 times, instead of a great unit once. You'll have a much better chance of taking a great bull over the course of several hunts in a non premier unit. Also seriously tips the species learning curve in your favor.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

[dirtytough]

800 non refundable for what? I just did a 3 point draw mule deer hunt this year that cost me a total of $515 buck over the course of 3 years of point+the draw and an archery permit. It was an unbelievable quality hunt. We saw some of the biggest bucks I've seen anywhere.

As I said, I've hunted WY for years out of state. I've done the math in my bank account

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

False-
A deer tag with 3 preference pts in Nevada $815
Same tag in Wyoming $515.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

There ya go dirtytough. Seems pretty straightforward to me. It's not hypothetical, some of us have actually already done this and counted the money and noted the quality of our hunts

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Who said just 1 species? I said its over $800 non refundable to apply and gain points in Wyoming every year for the male species. That is the truth. It is the most expensive state to apply in. Also I never said Wyoming doesn't have quality hunts. I plan on moving there just for the hunting benefits to residents. But I can also do the math as a non res.

 

[Jake Larsen]

Who said just 1 species? I said its over $800 non refundable to apply and gain points in Wyoming every year for the male species. That is the truth. It is the most expensive state to apply in. Also I never said Wyoming doesn't have quality hunts. I plan on moving there just for the hunting benefits to residents. But I can also do the math as a non res.

Fair enough, I didn't realize you were talking about buying points for every species, including the premier sheep/goat/moose as well as applying for tags for every species every year.

I was talking about comparing a more focused approach. For example, say I want to do a mule deer buck hunt specifically with good opportunities at bucks in the 170"+ category, and a chance at finding a deer in the 200" category. Pick any western state, i can do that hunt in WY for cheaper than anywhere.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

[menhaden_man]

Your right I apologize menhaden.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks fellas, no offense taken.

After living in 15 or so states and traveling every corner of the country pretty regularly for the last three decades, all this banter won’t change the fact that people are coming, developers are building, and pressure on wildlife is increasing. It’s coming to you next.

While WY G&F may have much room for improvement, I can’t think of any other western state with so few people and so many animals that have done as well with the resource (with by far the smallest budget by the way).

 

[Pathfinder19]

I will have to start hunting Wyoming. Lol

Sent from my SM-J337A using Tapatalk

 

[BuzzH]

What you are failing to realize is that it takes probably twice as many points to draw the plain Jane non wilderness units because all the nonresident hunters are applying for them. I have been fortunate to have hunted some really good land where I live and drawn some really good tags in other states and once you have experienced that then marginal units just don’t offer the same experience. That’s what most of us wants. To hunt the best land we can year after year without breaking the bank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like the fact that you see what you consider an injustice and your desire to change same. But to save you some trouble, there is really only 2 ways that you can make that happen.

1. You would have to argue in court that there is some reason that you are being unfairly treated as a NR hunter constitutionally. That's already been tried ad nauseum and in every case the higher courts have ruled in favor of the states right to discriminate against NR hunters any way they want. Lots of case law, including the Baldwin case, Shultz case, and a laundry list of other cases.

You should also be aware of s. 339 that passed in an appropriations package a number of years ago in response to the USO lawsuit under the dormant commerce clause. Pay attention to sec. 2 of that bill...it reaffirms the rights of the state to discriminate against NR hunters any way they see fit.

It would seem highly unlikely, if not downright impossible based on this bill as well as past case law, that you are going to have any luck pursuing this avenue in relief of your grievance.

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.

2. Your next option and the only viable option you have in my opinion is to change the current Wyoming Statute regarding the wilderness guide law. This would require a major lift by the people of Wyoming, since as a current NR, you have very little sway in local politics. You would be fighting a very conservative legislature that favors business over the needs of NR hunters, which IMO, is a contradictory example of "conservative" and "republican values". Seems that the Republican/conservatives rail away about keeping government out of business, free markets, and hate welfare...but then pass legislation like this that does 100% the opposite of their "core values". Seems hypocrisy isn't limited to one side of the aisle...but be that as it may, they did pass the law. You will also find that a good portion of Resident hunters here support the bill because it gives them a perceived place to escape from the throngs of NR hunters. I don't buy into that either, mainly because very few of the most vocal residents, don't even hunt designated wilderness for a variety of reasons. But even though most residents spend very little time in Wilderness, they just like the idea of limiting NR hunters.

Bottom line, is that even though I happen to agree with you on the basic premise that this is one of, if not the most egregious examples of NR's being discriminated against when it comes to public land and wildlife, there are just very few options to over-turn it. The WOGA has its hooks in the legislature, although things have changed in the past 10 years. They don't have the influence they did in the past, mainly due to the information age. Word travels fast these days and people are waking up...and showing up, wayyyy more than in the past.

The only way forward, the way I see it, is for the law to change and that will only happen at the hands of the Wyoming Residents.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

Question since most posts seem to suggest Wyoming has done this to benefit the guides (I always thought it was more to benefit the resident hunters). Can a NR hunter go with a Wy resident friend to hunt the areas, or are we talking about only bonafide for-profit registered guides they can go with?

 

[wytx]

Any resident with a big game license and they need the free resident guide license from the G&F.

 

[Jake Larsen]

Question since most posts seem to suggest Wyoming has done this to benefit the guides (I always thought it was more to benefit the resident hunters). Can a NR hunter go with a Wy resident friend to hunt the areas, or are we talking about only bonafide for-profit registered guides they can go with?

Any resident friend/family member can take a non resident hunter. And to be clear, it's the OPs opinion that this law was created for the sole purpose of favoring the outfitters. There's just as good an argument that it's part of a broader picture of a game/heard management strategy, and as you pointed out, creating benifits for the WY resident. WY has a pretty long history of doing things to specially help WY residents, not just in the outdoor world. For example, their UWO scholarship opportunities for any WY resident that graduates high school. It's one of the many reasons you'll find lots WY residents are die hard fans of their state. It also makes a pretty attractive scenario for people to move there... If you want to see the opposite of this mindset, just take a hard look at California.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

 

[ScreamingPotato]

Any resident with a big game license and they need the free resident guide license from the G&F.

Any resident friend/family member can take a non resident hunter. And to be clear, it's the OPs opinion that this law was created for the sole purpose of favoring the outfitters. There's just as good an argument that it's part of a broader picture of a game/heard management strategy, and as you pointed out, creating benifits for the WY resident. WY has a pretty long history of doing things to specially help WY residents, not just in the outdoor world. For example, their UWO scholarship opportunities for any WY resident that graduates high school. It's one of the many reasons you'll find lots WY residents are die hard fans of their state. It also makes a pretty attractive scenario for people to move there... If you want to see the opposite of this mindset, just take a hard look at California.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Thanks guys. So that's what I wanted to clear up. The way I see it, in light of these facts, is the state is looking out for their own residents and I think that's awesome, give them a place to escape the NR Fudds that flood in gobbling up everything in their way. At the same time the NR still has a way in if they really want to, by paying a guide/outfitter for the companionship. Perhaps the outfitters are simply secondary and jumped on board to take advantage since they technically qualify as the rules are written.

 

[BuzzH]

Let’s make one thing clear, the bill was brought forward by woga for their benefit of bolstering their business. Some would argue state sanctioned outfitter welfare. It passed because it only impacted nr hunters, because residents were complacent, and a legislature that puts business first. There wasn’t any real thought put into it by the average resident hunter...

 

[Trial153]

Outfitter welfare. Its amazing how so called conservatives are so fond of their own brand of handouts

 

[BuzzH]

Lets also get it straight that the NR tiered license fee structure, special VS regular fees, was also pushed for and brought forward by WOGA as well. They also pushed and brought forward the preference point system for NR elk, deer, and pronghorn.

They look out for their bottom line first and couldn't give a shit less about the average NR or R hunter...we're all just one thing to them, competition. If they thought they could get away with it, all of us would be required to have a guide and hire an outfitter.

Even more appalling to me is the fact that we sportsmen, both R and NR, fund the GF either directly or indirectly and they (outfitters) fund absolutely nothing. Like a good friend of mine once said, "we stock the shelves with wildlife and they take without paying a cent for it."

I'm also tired of the worn out line, "they aren't getting rich"....bullshit, they are getting rich. One outfitter brags about killing over 120 rams in Wyoming in part of their advertising, multiply 120x$10k+ and tell me no outfitter is getting rich off Wyoming's wildlife resources. Yeah, sure, practically in the soup line.

 

[Rmauch20]

I really hope this boycott of Wyoming by non residents thing takes off. Someone get a Facebook page going or something. This needs to happen!

No more no residents apply to Wyoming until we can hunt wilderness!!!!!

 

[elkhuntrr75]

I really hope this boycott of Wyoming by non residents thing takes off. Someone get a Facebook page going or something. This needs to happen!

No more no residents apply to Wyoming until we can hunt wilderness!!!!!

Haha you are so so tricky rmauch20. I almost fell for your guise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pathfinder19]

Well I guess that's the answer than.


Sent from my SM-J337A using Tapatalk

 

[Rmauch20]

Haha you are so so tricky rmauch20. I almost fell for your guise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree that not being able to hunt wilderness areas is annoying and does irritate just a little. That said, I think Wyoming has the best draw system and it is my favorite state to hunt.

 

[Rifleman86]

The only way I ever see it changing is on the Federal level, and I do believe it should change.

Something to the effect of “states cannot prohibit US citizens from hunting federally owned or managed land, provided they are properly licensed by the state therein. No state shall mandate the use of a outfitter or guide service for hunting or fishing on federally owned lands.”

Remember, we are all Americans, and we’re all nonresidents in 49 other states.

Furthermore I’d like to see legislation limiting nonresident tag costs to 10x that of a resident tag. I think paying 10 that of a resident to hunt in that state, where I’m bringing in tons of money elsewhere in food, hotels, gas, etc is wholly reasonable.

My state charges a measly $124 to nonresidents to hunt deer, and is one of the top whitetail states in the county. As bad as some of you guys bitch about western states mismanaging game, they look like geniuses compared to the ODNR.

Seems like both of these are issues the BHA should get behind and lobby Congress about... But instead I’ll probably hear about Land Tawney endorsing the next Democratic candidate for president.