Wyoming’s Wilderness Area Nonresident Restrictions

[elkhuntrr75]

Who mentioned hating Wyomings hunters? Are you having insecurity issues again?
You seem to be incapable of understanding that a conversation about law isnt a personal attack on you because of your residency

As for being bitter, your sorely mistaken, which by the way seems to be a common occurrence for you. If anything you come across bitter more often then not, maybe some self introspection is in order?
I am very thankful that I havent found your attitude to be in any way indicative any of the people I am lucky enough to know from WY.
I am very fortunate in hunting and even more fortunate in life. If nothing else anyone that knows me would say I am overly thankful and grateful. I will be even more grateful as soon as my tour is over and I can go home to my family tonight.



The heart of this is that this is bad law no matter what state it was written in.

Thank you for your service.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trial153]

Thank you for your service.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Na not serving at all, just stuck working. No thanks needed.

 

[Montana Slim]

Naa. It does reduce my draw odds cgas but it’s more than that. It’s about right and wrong. All the WY residents know that this law is not right but just don’t care because it benefits them. Apparently the outfitters are a powerful force in that state that can’t stand on their own without a handout. It probably didn’t take much, latching on to a couple of state reps. Politicians are really just lawyers. Need I say more.

WY residents keep mentioning that you can get around the law by going hunting with a Wyoming resident or move to the state all together. Well I don’t know one single person in Wyoming and after starting this topic I don’t see them lining up to accompany me, nor am I able to uproot my family and move to that great state. It’s just not in the cards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now you pontificate about what all WY residents know or feel. Again, WY owes you nothing. And I reckon you're right - you're not likely to have any WY residents lining up to help you out... after you whine and call the the state managing agency (who according to most accounts is doing a good job) a bunch of screaming crybabies? Talk about the pot and the kettle. Like many others have said - you can go on any federal land in WY, you just can't hunt the state managed wildlife.
You are pitching a fit because you cant do everything you want, every time you want, when you want to.

Then later you call yourself a meat hunter... apparently the only place for meat in WY is wilderness areas?

To put it in the parlance of our times:

#stopthemadness
#ironicwhining
#memememememememememe

 

[Rifleman86]

Nah, let it play out. I think this thread does an excellent job of educating Wyoming residents and outfitters on how the out-of-state hunter thinks.

Oh yeah, all those non residents and their crappy selfish attitudes.

Newsflash, everyone is a nonresident in 49 other states.

Nobody is saying residents should pay the same as nonresidents, or that draw odds should be same for residents and non residents.

Rather that there should not be any undue restrictions on properly licensed nonresidents on federally owned and managed land.

I’d be crying BS if Ohio suddenly restricted nonresidents from hunting Wayne National Forest in the same manner as Wyoming does. Sure, it would be advantageous to me if all of the sudden the nonresidents were gone or “guided” but I have the wherewithal to realize that would be completely unfair, that those nonresidents pay taxes to manage Wayne and an artificial guide requirement would be unfair to my fellow citizens who are already paying higher tag costs.

But yeah, I’m the bad guy with the shitty attitude. Got it.

 

[elkhuntrr75]

Now you pontificate about what all WY residents know or feel. Again, WY owes you nothing. And I reckon you're right - you're not likely to have any WY residents lining up to help you out... after you whine and call the the state managing agency (who according to most accounts is doing a good job) a bunch of screaming crybabies? Talk about the pot and the kettle. Like many others have said - you can go on any federal land in WY, you just can't hunt the state managed wildlife.
You are pitching a fit because you cant do everything you want, every time you want, when you want to.

Then later you call yourself a meat hunter... apparently the only place for meat in WY is wilderness areas?

To put it in the parlance of our times:

#stopthemadness
#ironicwhining
#memememememememememe

No friend you have it all wrong. I said that a lot of WY residents are crybabies when the state raises their tag prices $5 bucks, not the fish and game.

And I was responding to K1 who is obviously a meat hunter. You are obviously having a hard time following along.

#which.way.did.he.go.George.which.way. did.he.go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Montana Slim]

Wyoming G&F are the biggest crybabies that scream of there budget shortfalls every chance they get. I just wonder what they would say if the nonresident dollars were to fall off for a couple of years. I am sure that someone on here will chime in claiming that it is federal money that make up the majority of the department’s budget. I am not buying that. Without nonresident money Wyoming G&F budget would take a significant hit and do you think that the residents and outfitters will come to the rescue. I doubt it they seem to scream bloody murder every time their tag prices go up $5 bucks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh I think I'm following along ok... (that hashtag WAS funny though hahaha)

I do agree this thread should end. Nothing much productive here...

 

[elkhuntrr75]

Time to break this down...lets just say you wanted to hunt a designated wilderness in Wyoming. That leaves you with 2 options, either a general tag unit with designated wilderness or a LQ unit with designated wilderness.

The general tag hunting in designated wilderness isn't, IMO, a whole lot, if any, better than most of the areas you can hunt outside the wilderness. In some cases, think thorofare, the hunting probably is more crowded and the competition you'd have from all the outfitters would be off the charts. The average DIY guy in there is really at a huge disadvantage. The outfitters take the best camp locations, they run a shitload of hunters through their camps, they have fresh horses to ride every day, they have cooks, wranglers, etc. All the client and guides have to do is hunt. Assuming you have stock, you're going to have a tough time finding a place to even set your camp, you don't have a wrangler, a cook, a guy to haul meat back to the trailhead, etc. etc.

IMO/E, you're much better off and will see fewer people and have the same, if not better chance at a quality bull in a general unit hunting areas that ARE NOT in designated wilderness. Most of those areas have wayyyyy fewer outfitters and people with stock don't hunt those areas as hard either. A vast majority of the foot soldier elk hunters, wont go much more than a mile or two.

Your next option is to draw a LQ tag for the areas you mentioned in Park and Teton counties within designated wilderness. For starters, your 5 points aren't buying you a thing for those late tags, most are max point tags. Next, you're still going to have competition from the outfitters and you had best have some damn good stock to get you to the best bulls. The bulls in those areas are hard to reach for a foot soldier, the roads getting to Wyoming are going to be real fun pulling a horse trailer, etc. Major pain in the ass all the way around, but no doubt some quality bulls to be had, maybe the best in the State.

I would argue that if your odds are dog crap of drawing the LQ late wilderness hunts, you may as well be applying for the same type of quality outside the wilderness that could offer the same type of bull with a lot less hassle.

I've shot a fair number of bulls in both, and without access to good, and I mean damn good mountain horses, I wouldn't bother with the late hunts in the NW corner of the State. For the average guy, you're better off hunting the non-wilderness LQ tags since your odds, and points required to draw, are likely no worse or in some cases better. The bull quality is probably also pretty similar if you're willing to put the time in and not shoot anything but the top end bulls.

The difference in quality between wilderness and non-wilderness for either LQ or General tags, IMO, isn't worth the amount of extra effort unless you have access to very good horses and mules and enjoy competing with every outfitter in the area.

My 2 cents...

I agree that this topic has run its coarse and this is my final post. I meant no ill will against WY residents. I believe that if I was on your side of the fence I would probably feel the same way. People from Wyoming are very fortunate to live in that beautiful state and I have received the best most courteous treatment when I have hunted that state. You folks are truly very hospitable.

The reason I am ending quoting Buzz’s post is that he helps illustrate my 2nd of 2 pts. 1) being that outfitters don’t bring much to the table with regards to conservation dollars. They capitalize from what residents and nonresidents have funded and built up over the years.

The 2nd point that buzz helped me to illustrate is that even residents are beginning to feel like outsiders in WY premier units due to outfitters and their privileged clients, and that nobody can break up this rats nest in Wyoming except the people of Wyoming.

I don’t know if this law will ever get changed, if it is it definitely won’t be soon, but maybe it will get you guys to thinking about what outfitters bring to the table in your state and if nothing else you might get the outfitters to pay for the right to capitalize off of your states wildlife.

I think that other states aren’t far off from implementing other subsidies for the outfitter industry and you guys will find out what it’s like to be on the wrong side of the fence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[slick]

Just to play devils advocate.

Outfitters and Guides don’t personally pay anymore for the critter’s they are taking.

But how many thousands of dollars do they bring to the local economies? Maybe not much. I find it thought provoking at the very least. And the money that gets dumped into PR funds because they (G&O) make something available to a client that otherwise might not partake in hunting activities- therefore not buying licenses, rifles, ammo, etc. Just something to think about I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schism]

While I don’t like Wyoming’s law regarding unaccompanied NR’s in the wilderness, I’m not going to complain because they don’t HAVE to allow a NR to hunt at all. Bottom line is that management of game is the responsibility of each state and they can place restrictions on hunters as they see fit. Pricing, season dates and locations are all established by each individual game management agency and they don’t have to be fair or even across the board. My state of residence doesn’t even allow NR’s to enter the elk tag lottery.

 

[ozyclint]

UNITED States??

 

[BuzzH]

Just to play devils advocate.

Outfitters and Guides don’t personally pay anymore for the critter’s they are taking.

But how many thousands of dollars do they bring to the local economies? Maybe not much. I find it thought provoking at the very least. And the money that gets dumped into PR funds because they (G&O) make something available to a client that otherwise might not partake in hunting activities- therefore not buying licenses, rifles, ammo, etc. Just something to think about I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If every outfitter evaporated from Wyoming, we would still sell every single NR elk tag. They had an undue amount of influence in the past in regard to "feathering their own nest". Those days are over, thankfully.

In 2016 and 2017 they tried to run a bill to swap the 60-40 NR split between Regular/Special NR fee structure to 60% special fee and 40% regular. Myself and a few other guys along with WYBHA made sure that bill never made it out of committee either year. WOGA made an offer and asked us to support a 50-50 split and we told them to pound sand. They never tried to run it in 2018, doubt they will try again anytime soon, they got rolled big-time on it.

Just another example of how much they care about only themselves and well-heeled clients. I wont sit back and let them have their way at the expense of DIY, blue collar NR hunters.

 

[Steve O]

Nah, that’s BS. I can’t hunt Federally owned and managed wilderness without paying an outfitter an exorbitant amount of money. It’s wholly right for states to limit NR hunting and or make it advantageous to be a resident of that state. But artificially requiring the use of a guide just because you stepped over an imaginary line is BS, and the justification for the law is BS.

Just because Joe Blow has lived in Wyoming in a year doesn’t mean he’s more prepared for a Wilderness hunt than the nonresident who might have been hunting the backcountry for 20 years.

I can go try and and climb Gannet Peak without an outfitter, but I need a guide to backpack into a wilderness area to hunt elk in Sept?

The law is horseshit. Let free market needs dictate the outfitting industry, not artificial government influence.

And if you have lived your entire life in Wyoming, even been a guide on all those scary wilderness lands, if you move 20 miles and become a resident of Utah, Colorado, Montana ect, you are magically stripped of all your knowledge and you are not qualified to hunt those same Wyoming wilderness lands. It is such a scam. Unfortunately it is all about money and it is not going to change.

 

[Rifleman86]

And if you have lived your entire life in Wyoming, even been a guide on all those scary wilderness lands, if you move 20 miles and become a resident of Utah, Colorado, Montana ect, you are magically stripped of all your knowledge and you are not qualified to hunt those same Wyoming wilderness lands. It is such a scam. Unfortunately it is all about money and it is not going to change.

Agreed, it probably won’t change. The only way it could is at the federal level, and I think it should. If Wyoming wants to add such a requirement to state land so be it. But it goes against everything American to force American citizens to pay a private service to hunt their land. That goes well beyond Wyoming’s right to manage its game population.

I would like to think it could be something passed at the federal level and applicable to 50 states, but I have a feeling all that would happen is politicians from other states would get wise ideas about how to prop up the outfitting industry in their own state.

Again, I would love to see BHA pressing this issue, but all I hear are crickets... they seem more worried about electric bikes and global warming.

 

[Beendare]

Nah, let it play out. I think this thread does an excellent job of educating Wyoming residents and outfitters on how the out-of-state hunter thinks.

Yep...

...but unless non Res were to boycott Wyoming outfitters [a good idea] ....its going to fall on deaf ears.

.....

 

[BuzzH]

Agreed, it probably won’t change. The only way it could is at the federal level, and I think it should. If Wyoming wants to add such a requirement to state land so be it. But it goes against everything American to force American citizens to pay a private service to hunt their land. That goes well beyond Wyoming’s right to manage its game population.

I would like to think it could be something passed at the federal level and applicable to 50 states, but I have a feeling all that would happen is politicians from other states would get wise ideas about how to prop up the outfitting industry in their own state.

Again, I would love to see BHA pressing this issue, but all I hear are crickets... they seem more worried about electric bikes and global warming.

Not true, apparently you didn't pay attention in 9th grade civics? Ever heard of the 10th amendment? Any other amendments you ignore or don't think are important? Funny how again the hard core Conservatives R's all rail away about State's rights, right up until their ox is gored by those rights. Then they howl about how the "feds" should step in and by-pass/ignore the 10th...sorry Charlie, doesn't work that way.

Then there's the case law that I've already cited as well as s. 339 that reaffirms the States right to discriminate anyway they want against NR hunters.

It would be a colossal waste of resources for any conservation group to oppose a State law that has been repeatedly upheld as constitutional and codified under s.339. Its settled law, plain and simple.

I don't like the Wilderness guide law any more than anyone else, but its a non-starter to oppose it at the Federal level and frankly, shouldn't be. I believe state rights and the 10th are important parts of our Constitution.

The ONLY way to change it is at the State level...fact.

 

[Billinsd]

Not true, apparently you didn't pay attention in 9th grade civics? Ever heard of the 10th amendment? Any other amendments you ignore or don't think are important? Funny how again the hard core Conservatives R's all rail away about State's rights, right up until their ox is gored by those rights. Then they howl about how the "feds" should step in and over-step the 10th...sorry Charlie, doesn't work that way.

I don't like the Wilderness guide law any more than anyone else, but its a non-starter to oppose it at the Federal level and frankly, shouldn't be. I believe state rights and the 10th are important parts of our TRUE Conservatives don't.

I don't like the Wilderness guide law any more than anyone else, but its a non-starter to oppose it at the Federal level and frankly, shouldn't be. I believe state rights and the 10th are important parts of our Constitution.

I'm SUPER pro states rights, because I'm a hardcore Conservative. I'm with Buzz on this one and do not like the law either. However, he calls people Conservative too liberally and interchanges Republican with Conservative, which is incorrect. I believe less than 20% of Registered Republicans are Conservatives, it's a really small minority. And of course some Conservatives are corrupt, with the highest percentage being Utah politicians. Bill

 

[BuzzH]

Read again, I didn't lump conservatives and R's...forgot the "/"...

 

[Rifleman86]

Not true, apparently you didn't pay attention in 9th grade civics? Ever heard of the 10th amendment? Any other amendments you ignore or don't think are important? Funny how again the hard core Conservatives R's all rail away about State's rights, right up until their ox is gored by those rights. Then they howl about how the "feds" should step in and by-pass/ignore the 10th...sorry Charlie, doesn't work that way.

Then there's the case law that I've already cited as well as s. 339 that reaffirms the States right to discriminate anyway they want against NR hunters.

It would be a colossal waste of resources for any conservation group to oppose a State law that has been repeatedly upheld as constitutional and codified under s.339. Its settled law, plain and simple.

I don't like the Wilderness guide law any more than anyone else, but its a non-starter to oppose it at the Federal level and frankly, shouldn't be. I believe state rights and the 10th are important parts of our Constitution.

The ONLY way to change it is at the State level...fact.

Woah woah easy there killer, must’ve hit a nerve there with the BHA comment I guess.

A) I never claimed to be an expert in the case law on this subject. But I do believe it’s bad case law in this specific case because it’s federal land.

B) Yes, I completely agree in States having the right to manage game as they see fit. However forcing non residents to pay for an outfitter isn’t “managing” game, It’s extortion to a private entity for the benefit of that private entity. They want to limit or not give me a tag? Fine. They want to charge me 10k for a tag? Fine. But forcing the use of an outfitter isn’t managing game. It’s managing to help donors.

C.) I’m not a Republican or a Democrat, however I do believe firmly in INDIVIDUAL rights, and the feds stepping in to protect an individual right, such as the right to hunt their land without being forcibly extorted is wholly within their bounds.

I’m not an attorney, it’s been a long time since I’ve been in school, but I’ll always stand on behalf of the rights of the individual before that of the state, or any government for that matter.

ETA Oh, and though I don’t personally feel the federal government protecting access to federal lands is a violation of the 10th amendment, when was the last time the feds gave a shit about the 10th amendment? Is forcing me to buy healthcare specifically spelled out in the constitution as role of the federal government? (Oh that’s right, that was a “tax”, pretty sure that was bad case law too.)

 

[robtattoo]

I think it bears repeating, in bold, caps & underlined;
NOBODY IS 'FORCING' ANYONE TO HIRE A GUIDE IN WYOMING. YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO HUNT STATE OWNED GAME, ON FEDERALLY OWNED LAND, WITH ANY RESIDENT!
You also have the other (wild ass guess) 80+% percent of the state to hunt, unguided, unaccompanied & however you see fit.
I'm not a resident (sheeit, I ain't even a citizen!) but I've managed to hunt Wyoming 6 years out of the last 10 (I didn't even apply for anything for 2 of those 10) & I keep going because of the quantity & quality of game, the IMMENSE amount of public land, the open access & the cost of the hunt (2 doe antelope + a cow elk for under $350???)

 

[BuzzH]

Woah woah easy there killer, must’ve hit a nerve there with the BHA comment I guess.

A) I never claimed to be an expert in the case law on this subject. But I do believe it’s bad case law in this specific case because it’s federal land.

B) Yes, I completely agree in States having the right to manage game as they see fit. However forcing non residents to pay for an outfitter isn’t “managing” game, It’s extortion to a private entity for the benefit of that private entity. They want to limit or not give me a tag? Fine. They want to charge me 10k for a tag? Fine. But forcing the use of an outfitter isn’t managing game. It’s managing to help donors.

C.) I’m not a Republican or a Democrat, however I do believe firmly in INDIVIDUAL rights, and the feds stepping in to protect an individual right, such as the right to hunt their land without being forcibly extorted is wholly within their bounds.

I’m not an attorney, it’s been a long time since I’ve been in school, but I’ll always stand on behalf of the rights of the individual before that of the state, or any government for that matter.

A. Doesn't matter what you believe, the cases have been tried and the courts repeatedly side with the right of the States to discriminate against NR hunters and find the laws to be constitutional. Like it or not, believe what you want, but that's the way we do battle, in court.

B. If you believe in the right of the State to manage game as they see fit, then the wilderness guide law is something you should have no problem with. Plus, you are NOT being extorted or forced in any way to hunt or even apply for a tag where wilderness exists. You know what the law says, you know what the limitations are to access Wyoming's wildlife within designated wilderness. Further, you are not being denied access to Federal Land...only access to Wyoming's big and trophy game. In addition there are legal ways for you to hunt wilderness for big and trophy game here: 1. Become a resident 2. Know a resident that will get the free resident guide license and hunt with you.

C. The feds stepping in to create fairness to the individual is a liberal concept, period. Again, anything not delegated to the Federal Government is within the States right to govern as they see fit. Where in the constitution or bill of rights does the Federal Government have authority to manage a states wildlife? There are 3 places where the feds retain those rights and those are retained via Acts of congress specific to 3 cases: 1. Migratory waterfowl 2. Anadromous fish and 3. Endangered species. Other than that, the states have the right to manage all other wildlife within their states border, under case law and the 10th, as they see fit. The individual is afforded the right to lobby the State in regard to how the wildlife is managed.