WY Nonresident Wilderness Law?

E

ElmerFudd

Very Active Member
Messages
2,434
I looked through the G&F regulations to read up on the guides required for nonresidents hunting big game in the wilderness law. Could not find it. Called G&F, the information specialist knew nothing. Just wanted to read the law, see what the penalities are, and such. Anyone know of where I can find it, or any of those details?
 
Thanks. Scroll down to 23-2-417(a) for possible peanalities. A year in the big house, 5 year license suspension, and a $2K fine. Wow! Pretty steep for just hunting with a legal license and tag on public land during the open season for the tag! I was guessing something like $100!
 
Elmer,
Usually they give you a 250 dollar fine if caught. Every year they catch a couple guys. I've never heard of them handing out anything big regarding it.

Your best bet is to find a wy resident who would go back with you. But those are rare too, when I lived in WY I couldn't find very many people willing to do a high country hunt.
 
The real irony is you could take your family on a hiking trip or you and some buddies could play around in a wilderness area all year long, but as soon as you want to hunt it it's off limits...?

That's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard, and can't believe somebody with a little money hasn't challenged that "law" already! Lawyers can get a raping, child-molesting, murderer off, but they can't beat a non-resident hunting in the wilderness of WY without a guide ticket...?

Obviously the governor's brother-in-law was a guide when that rule came into existence:)
 
Nores can actually hunt inside Wyoming wilderness...but...not for big game! You can actually hunt birds, small game, predators, etc without a guide!

I grew up in Wyoming and did some pretty "greenhorn" things while hunting Wyo wilderness when I was a kid. Now that I moved outside the border I can't return and hunt the same areas without a guide! I know...stop the belly-aching! You can blame the outfitters association for this one!

Alaska has similar laws where nonres must hire a guide to hunt sheep, mtn goat, grizz, and brown bear. I can almost understand having this in Alaska..but Wyo wilderness come on! Colo and other states w/wilderness ought to require Wyo res to hire a guide!
 
YUP! I can see it now....Kali requires Wyos to use a guide when at shopping malls!

I disagree with the wliderness law too!
 
Why are all of us that are so against Outfitter Welfare programs so unorganized? I don't see how any court could uphold this ridiculous law, as well as outfitter/guide set asides for various states like my own (NV). I don't understand why a government organization selling an public tag be allowed to give preferences to those that use a certain private enterprise. I would be willing to donate a good sum of money to a transparent organization, to hire a good attourney, to start knocking down these welfare laws.
 
I'd donate if I know who to donate to and it was going to a cause like that... Actually though, WY's powerful guide lobby is a double edged sword to nonresidents, and a bad deal for resident hunters. It is why WY has such a relative large (20-25%) nonresident quota on hunts, yet is also why you have that law on the books.
 
Elmer makes a great point. It's the Guides association that lobbied the higher nonresident tag allocation(and also the wilderness law). It will cost a NR more to hunt there but it also provides more opportunity...
 
I know in a couple of states USO outfitters started this with law suites against the W&P.He did finally lose in Kansas when he sued to get resident turkey tags.I believe it's one of the only business that the government guarantees that a business will have customers.
 
I'm pretty sure it wasn't too many years ago that nonres weren't allowed to hunt deer in KS? I can't remember if it was muledeer, whitetails, or both?

I'm pretty sure USO also tried to change nonres tag quotas in NV. It worked for a year or so and then NV converted back to their old ways!

Nonres aren't allowed to apply and draw RFW tags in Colo and CMU's in Utah....the list goes on where nonres get the short end of the stick.

I enjoy hunting other states but also believe residents that pay taxes and live in a state should have a little presidence over nonres. This usually means fewer tags and higher license fees for nonres....which to me is very understandable. Closing public federal land to nonresident hunters that don't hire guides seems like an entirely different issue to me!
 
Understand that I have no relatives that are guides in Wyoming, but here is another point of view.
Most of the wilderness in Wyoming, is teaming with Grizzly Bears. By requiring a licensed guide, Wyoming is assuring that hunters have someone with them that is trained in how to hang out and deal with these dangerous creatures. On my sheep hunt we were always having to look out for bears. We couldn't even spit our tooth paste on the ground in camp to keep them out. I was so glad to have my guide with me in that situation, that the fee I paid him was well worth the comfort of knowing I didn't have to deal with that issue.
Now I know you are going to say that it's OK for hikers, etc., but hikers are not dealing with raw meat and gut piles, etc.
So in a sense, Wyoming is assuring themselves that they don't have to pay out big bucks to go find bears that attack hunters, because that is the guide's responsibility.
It is tough to make a living in Wyoming and a lot of guys are able to do it because they can guide in the fall. I suspect that if we all lived up there we might have a little different view.
Now don't get me wrong. I don't think it is fair, but aren't there better things to put our money behind, like controlling the wolves that are eating our elk, deer, sheep, and moose as we speak?
My guided experience up there may be the only one I will be able to afford, but it was worth every penny.
 
A friend of mine was ticketed in H for hunting in the wilderness. Fine was $100. He told the officer that he would gladly pay the fine every year to be able to hunt, there. He was told that it wouldn't be a very good idea. So I think the stiffer fines might be for repeat offenders.

Don P.
 
The grizzly bear issue.

Alaska requires a guide for sheep, goat and brown bear, but not for moose, caribou, deer or black bear. When hunting any of those animals one will encounter grizzlies. I have hunted Alaska many times both as a resident and a non-resident what is the difference.

Montana does not require a guide for anything and has many more grizzlies than Wyoming. The overturning of the Wyoming guide law will be the precedence for overturning the Alaskan guide law.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-26-09 AT 06:01PM (MST)[p]So, does being a resident automatically know more about grizzly bears and how to hunt around them, whereas being a resident does? Most of WY's human population is not in grizzly country. If grizzlies were the issue, how about a mandatory on line course for anyone hunting in grizzly country? BS it's just guide welfare behind the law.

Besides, the only guy I personally know who was mauled by a grizzly was hunting with a guide:

http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2007/10/31/news/000bear.txt
 
By and large, I wish the designated Wilderness of Wyoming was reserved for Res. hunters only!
Think we well and above earn it, each and every day!
Current law is good--don't care to have Wyo become run-over generic, because we aren't.

Rump
 
> By and large, I
>wish the designated Wilderness of
>Wyoming was reserved for Res.
>hunters only!
> Think we well and
>above earn it, each and
>every day!
> Current law is good--don't
>care to have Wyo become
>run-over generic, because we aren't.
>
>
>Rump
>

Ok, I'll bite. How have you earned it? How about reciprocal laws for WY residents of other states? Would that be ok with you?
 
As a wyoming resident I like the wilderness law, it keeps the number of hunters in these areas down so all you have to compete with is other resident hunters and outfitters. It's nice to be able to have the option to do a general hunt in the wilderness many miles back in and only see few if any people. However I do agree it is kind of a weird law, but like it the way it is. Also don't agree with Alaska's law either but if I lived there I'd probably think it was fine. Alaskas may be worse in that you can hunt moose or caribou anywhere you want but have to go guided for the big ticket items like sheep, goat, and grizz.

Oh an Elk375, it is my understanding that Wyoming has the largest population of grizzly bear in the lower 48 which is the reason they are delisted here and not in Idaho or Montana
 
ColoOak--
I'm not talking about just hunting, or fishing, or wanking yourself in the wilds. I'm talking about what a family brought up in this State actually produces for this State as compared to ANY other State, Greener Territory included, respectfully.

Rump
 
Let me say that I feel the WY law is one of the dumbest laws I have heard of dealing with hunting! It is a law based on GREEDINESS! plain and simple no arguments about it. I hope it gets changed.

With that being said, I have been part of these border battles before and the only people that benefits is the Gov't by getting more $$$ through fees, fines, etc. Minnesota, North/South Dakota and Wisconsin had one these battles a while back and it is NOT any fun for the hunter. Basically don't wish for something that you'd not want.
If there was a organization that is trying to change it, just support them.

Mntman

"Hunting is where you prove yourself"
 
Its been herd by the courts several times, and every time its been ruled constitutional, and with congress strengthening the states rights laws on regulating wildlife a few years ago, I don't think there is a snow balls chance of getting that law overturned , Im a resident so I think its great, but I know how some of you feel.
 
Not sure I understand what you're saying, rump. Are you saying that a family from WY produces more for the state of WY than a family from any other state produces for their state? I don't see how you came up with that, and more importantly, I don't see what it has to do with this subsidy that is being provided to the outfitting industry in WY.
 
I guess I'll be perhaps the only WY resident in the entire state that believes this law is BS.

I find it troubling that a state is stopping NR hunters from entering wilderness areas to hunt big-game for a couple reasons:

1. The law was put in place by the outfitters and guides as a way to subsidize their industry. Its nothing but welfare for them, plain and simple.

2. Many of the animals that live in WY's wilderness areas are born, raised, and ultimately die on PUBLIC lands. Since all tax paying citizens support management of public lands, they are being shafted big-time by this type of state legislation. The arguement you hear is that the state owns the wildlife, thats true. But, perhaps WY residents should be charged additional taxes to cover the expenses of the states animals that live on public lands and utilize wilderness areas within the state.

I feel that the states having control of the animals is important, but its equally important that the tax paying United States Citizen should have equal opportunity to any form of legal recreation they desire. Most certainly they should not have to subsidize an industry in any state via ridiculous regulations like this.

Oh, and yes, I feel the same way about the guide laws in AK, the outfitter sponsored licenses in MT, and also all forms of transferable licenses in CO, NM, etc.

The publics resources should not be made available to only the influential, only landowners, only outfitters, etc.

Laws like the above mentioned are eroding the hunting heritage as fast, if not faster, than development.

This crap needs to stop.
 
Ok, ColoradoOak, I'll bite...

Reciprocal laws for WY residents in other states would be just fine with me. I can hunt anything my little heart desires right here in my home state.

Seems to me that the great state of Colorado does something similar, as only Colorado residents can apply for moose tags in several units, much of which is public land that is mine as much as yours. Doesn't bother me a bit. If I want to hunt Colorado, I guess I'll follow their rules and hunt in the units, on the public land that the state allows me to hunt. Might be we should have reciprical laws for Colorado residents and Wyoming residents, then we'd be even...

Perhaps we could solve both of our problems by doing away with Wyoming's wilderness non-resident law and then creating new hunt units along the wilderness boundaries and making them only available to Wyoming residents, that way everyone would be happy except for the outfitters.
 
You're comparing apples to oranges. Allocation of tags is not the issue. If it were, then I would ask you why there are sheep units in WY that I can not apply for as a non-resident.

The system that Wyoming has set up requires non-residents to monetarily subsidize a private industry in Wyoming in order to hunt on public lands. Good luck finding a similar program in Colorado. We allow non-residents to hunt on all public lands that residents may hunt with the same license. Pretty fair, huh?

The law doesn't really concern me, as I have the means to hunt in the wilderness without hiring an outfitter, and have done so twice in the last 4 years. But you would think that the outfitters in your state could do well enough on their own without being propped up by this welfare program from the state. The funny thing is, those same outfitters would probably be the first to b1tch about any other government welfare program for a different group of people.
 
some of the reason this became law was, in order to designate many of these large wilderness ares in WY there needed to be political support from the outfitters, and if these areas weren't protected when they were, a lot of them would have been lost, one thing is, it wouldn't be right to change after asking for trust and support, and another is, people like me are really thankful that we still have these beautiful intact wildlands. It wasn't easy or fun getting these areas protected
 
piper,

Where did you hear the BS you just typed? I think you pulled that out off somewhere other than thin air.

I mean really, if we didnt support outfitters via welfare, then no wilderness would have been designated in WY?

I believe I've now heard everything...good grief. The excuses for outfitter welfare never end.

There did not need to be political support from outfitters in WY to get the 1964 FEDERAL wilderness act passed. They didnt have a choice and nobody asked for their support.

I will agree with you, from a very selfish standpoint, that the wilderness law is a good deal for residents. But, I would support legislation to over-turn it.

Since you mentioned "fair"....how is it fair to the US tax payers that live out of Wyoming that have their tax dollars pay to support WY's wildlife? In particular when they are excluded from hunting the land they own, the very land that is supporting much of WY's wildlife?

Also, how is the state subsidizing one industry via legislation like this FAIR to other businesses that arent being subsidized?

You can think what you want, but the wilderness guide law is a joke and truly unfair for many reasons.
 
I think WY legislature only meets for a month or two, in the winter. It's a part time job. Now think for a minute, who gets a couple of months off to fill in with a part time job in the winter? So if certain interests get disproportionate support, there is likely a reason. Not saying it's worse than full time politicians on the take, but.....
 
What are you talking about Buzz? Who said anything about the actual 1964 wilderness law? I said some of the large wilderness areas, individual areas are designated wilderness in different years, and support has to come from many of those that live in proximity and whos livelyhoods are affected, If you have been involved in the process, you would understand. I personally wasn't involved in the Wyoming designations, but have spoke to people that were, I remember the the 1984 wilderness bill that designated many areas in Nevada, in order to get it done there was a compromise in the Rubys, large areas were deleated in order to get support from the Heli skiing operation there, I hated it, but it had to be done. politics is a nasty business.
 
Piper,

I would like to see some remote proof to what you're saying.

Show me any public record that backs up the crap you've suggested here.

I'll save you the effort...there isnt any.

Whomever you've been talking to that told you the state of Wyoming...or more correctly...the FEDERAL government, sat down at a table in 1964 (when the vast majority of wilderness was designated in WY) with outfitters and agreed to the wilderness guide law (a STATE REGULATION)...obviously is living in la-la land and hasnt the foggiest clue what they're talking about. Obviously they were not involved in the process and dont understand the difference between federal and state regulations and laws.

The passing of the wilderness act is a FEDERAL regulation, not a state issue.

The outfitters were not promised jack $hit by the wilderness law...only by the state legislature that supports outfitter welfare. I do know that the outfitting industry did lobby for the STATE wilderness guide law, but they didnt have much, if any influence on what was designated wilderness.

If you can provide anything in the public record regarding negotiations between the federal government, the state of wyoming, and the outfitters promising outfitters with the welfare wilderness guide law if they agreed to more wilderness...I'd be happy to change my mind.
 
There is no use arguing with you , its obvious you have never been involved is the passing of that type of legislation, If its just a federal issue, why have all these county hearings, to obtain support, why did Harry Reid have someone draw cherry stems and other boundrys lines for the heliskiers? there was no public input on that, thats the way it works, thats how things get done through federal senators and state and local politicians, it doesn't matter anyway, because the law won't change, the states control the wildlife and and that was just made iron clad, with the help of senator Reid.
 
piper, let me give you a little background on the guide law in Wyoming.

The original guide law, W.S. 23-54 (1957), was challenged in Schakel v. State, Wyo., 513 P.2d 412 (1973) and found to be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. That statute required non-residents to hire a guide for hunting of sheep, deer, elk or moose in any national forest, national game refuge or national park.

The subsequent statute (today's guide law), W.S. 23-2-401(a)(1977), was challenged in O'brien v. State (1986 WY 8, Wyo., 711 P.2d 1144). The law was affirmed in the majority opinion of that case, but if you read that opinion you will see that the B.S. level is so elevated that I suspect chest waders would not save you. The dissenting opinion finds that the current law is equally as unconstitutional as the original, and that the law is not a rational means to the desired ends.

Wilderness areas in Wyoming were designated in four seperate years. The orignal four were designated in 1964:

Bridger
North Absaroka
Teton
Washakie

Next was the Fitzpatrick in 1976, followed by Savage Run in 1978.

The other eight wilderness areas in the state were designated in 1984.

Considering that the first guide law went into effect in 1957, and its successor in 1977, it seems that your argument may only hold for the designation of the Savage Run Wilderness.
 
Thanks,I have been trying to look that up, and seems my source was mislead or was misleading, the current law has been challenged in court several times I believe, and found to be constitutional,correct? I don't see any way that the law will be changed. The majority of hunters in this state would not want to see some of the wilderness areas overrun with nonresident hunters as some of the nonwilderness areas have become. I guess a case could be made for spreading hunting pressure out, and the lack of management by the game and fish, but despite the lack in popularity of outfitters by many the general public, I don't think a proposed change would fly very well
 
Piper,

I suspect as more NR look into this law, eventually it wont be a matter of if WY residents and WY outfitters think its a good law.

Its going to come down to a court case and I believe this law is on very, very, very flimsy ground. Even in spite of the Reid bill, I still believe it is.

I think the case could be argued in a court of a violation of constitutional law and also on the merits of denying public access to public lands in an end run around the constitution.

Time will tell.

Oh, and Oak, I'll sign off for you this year, just like I have in the past, so you can hunt in any wilderness in WY without an outfitter.
 
piper, I encourage you to read the dissenting opinion in O'brien v. State. Heck, sit down and read the whole thing. It's pretty interesting.

Thanks Buzz!
 
Piper, I have breezed through the posts and think you are missing the boat here a little bit? Hunting pressure and wilderness laws are totally different scenerios.

According to the Wyo regs only a fraction of big game tags go to nonresidents. All deer and elk units in Wyoming are limited quota for nonres hunters. However, there are general over the counter elk and deer units available to residents and residents make up the largest chunk of hunters in all units in Wyo! Wyomings res population continues to grow and hunting pressure in unlimited general units continues to climb.

If Wyo really wants to reduce hunting pressure they need to limit the number of residents in many of the current unlimited deer and elk units! If nonres were suddenly allowed to hunt wilderness the WG&F could potentially limit hunters by limiting the number of tags issued....of which nonres are only a small fraction of the tags!

The wilderness issue and hunting pressure have very little to do with eachother...especially in general units where there are unlimited number of residents hunters!
 
Jimbo, they created the wilderness law to keep you greenies out. It's what you get for moving south of the border. Actually yer off on two counts. Wyoming's population is forecast to decrease as energy prices continue to drop. Second, with G & F always operating on a shoestring budget, they will lose lot's of money getting rid of those general area's. Then they might have to pass on that shortfall in the form of higher costs to you non rezzy's. It's a no win deal...
 
'Kay, back, had impo things to do for a little while in Casper.
The essential law to me is one of self-(pardon)"policing", for lack of a palatable term. The State has not burdened the limited Game Warden cadre with keeping the Wildernesses from becoming non-Wildernesses(DON'T tell me it wouldn't happen in a YEAR!), nor have they relied on our local Forest Service bunch to have any idea whatsoever to do if not firstly directed by non-local Forest Service, whom are honestly not trusted with a damn thing!
The Pros that know what goes on and probably will go on, with their skill, and self-admittedly, art, in the State are State Pros, not Fed "pros", nor Non-Res. Pros! (due respects). I do consider the Wyo. Outfitters as Pros, also, but with a different policy.
Far as the whining about Wyo's law, shoulda' raised a stink about your own before letting it go down your tubes! I'm about sick of hearing yer crapola!

Rump
 
jims-you are right, the residents tags are the ones that should be controled, I was thinking about the deer herds in the salt rivers and wyoming ranges, the famous greys river country gets a lot of pressure from both residents and non resident hunters, but the non residents really hit it hard, backpacking tents at the head of every drainage on opening day, I would hate to see the Gros Ventre mountains get hit that hard, even though they get plenty of pressure, its not as bad and the wilderness designation is probably the reason why. I think resident hunters see the increased pressure in their hunting areas and I bet those that hunt the wilderness would be against changing the law for fear of even more pressure. in reality it could even nonresident pressure out, and in things like sheep hunting in the Absarokas, where there are so few nonresident tags anyway, what does it matter. Im probably rambling here, but I think the wilderness guide law is BS really, and I do wish the Game and Fish would manage the resident hunters, but they don't seem to get it.
 
My own personal surveys down the Grey's River drainage have shown a 5:1 resident to nonresident plate count.

Are residents overhunting the Grey's?

Not by my numbers
 
I think both are, more residents hunt, but the nons hunt harder, they don't get tags every year, and they come a long ways usually, I bet if you took a chopper and spent all day and visited the nylon tents set up on top of the salt rivers or Hoback area, it would be more like a 50/ 50 split. just a guess from what I have observed
 
> Far as the whining
>about Wyo's law, shoulda' raised
>a stink about your own
>before letting it go down
>your tubes! I'm about sick
>of hearing yer crapola!
>
>Rump

If that's directed at me, I have no idea what you're talking about.

You should get used to hearing the "crapola". That's a good description of this law. It will be challenged again, and it will be overturned. And then I don't want to hear any "crapola" from you, ok?
 
Here are some interesting harvest stats taken directly from the WG&F.

Unit 144, 742 resident hunters, 24% harvest success, ~18 days/harvest in 2007.
Unit 144, 350 nonres hunters, 47% harvest success, ~11 days/harvest in 2007.

Unit 145, 750 res htrs, 28% harvest success, ~16 days/harvest in 07'.
Unit 145, 159 nonres hunters, 53% harvest success, 10 days/harvest.

According to these stats there were 2 and 4x more residents than nonres hunting units 144 and 145 in 2007. It may be a shocker, but the 2x and 4x resident hunters in these units took almost twice as many days of hunting to harvest a buck!
 
Welfare sponserd by any government sucks! To bad many Wyoming and Alaska outfitters live on it.It's like making non-resi's sit in the back of the bus or drink from the other water fountain.Discrimination in any form sucks and the laws need to be changed at the federal level since the good old boy's way always dies hard.Lets get these biased laws changed! BH1
 
ColoOak--
I truly doubt the law will be lenienced.
Try get a "special" thing through the Leg. is more than pulling teeth--look at the stink WE raised, as commoner residents, when the outfitters tried for set-asides here in Wyo--shut down. Lots of beotching on those politicians phones and in their faces at their after-hour bars over that attempt.
That's us against us; think any outside influences are going to carry any real weight, or for that matter, merit?
Game and Fish is to be credited with supporting the current quo. They have MORE than enough to do as is with this State's wildlife future than make some out-of-town pole-sitter think he or she has the right to anything "special".

With all respects, fellow hunter,
Rump
 
Lets try and look at this from a different perspective.

What poses a greater threat to a persons safety? Freeways or wilderness areas? Without a doubt freeways! Freeways require more rescues, are the scene of more deaths and place a greater burden on rescue resources than wilderness areas.

Now lets make the unsubstantiated assumption that all drivers from Wyoming can't be trusted to drive on major freeways in other states because...after all...Wyoming doesn't have any big bad dangerous freeways like other parts of the country.

So let me ask all the residents of Wyoming out there; Would it be fair to pass a law that forbid you from driving on freeways with more than three lanes, or overpasses, etc.? Would it be just to require you to have a guide in your car if you wanted to drive through Salt Lake City or Denver? Maybe you used to drive daily on the LA freeways but you live in Wyoming now..."Sorry doesn't matter, you're from Wyoming therefore you will get into trouble on OUR freeways so you have to have a guide".

Does this sound right??????
 
>Does this sound right??????

Sure, what the hell. We need a few discrimnatory laws on the books. If yer successful at getting them to change the law, see if you can get them to ban outfitting also. Then it'd really be a win-win...
 
After reading Obrian VS state, it sounds to me like the law is not very well grounded to say the least, and with limited quotas protecting big game from overharvest, protecting wildlife cannot be used as a reason. I would guess ColoradOak could be right
 
You and ColoOak probably are technically in the right, piper, but I just do not believe when it it comes to sinking responsibility for such a change that Wyo will stick the G&F with such a thing; and whom else could they shoulder enforcement with? No one. And who is to say the Res. population doesn't come out again to raise the ugly threat of non-re-election to our Legislature, regardless of the written words?
We're that way, amazingly enough!!

Rump
 
I know a loophole around this. I talked with the F&G about it and asked if a guy took the super easy guide lisence test through the mail if he could guide himself in the wilderness. They said no, you cannot guide yourself.
Then I asked if 2 buddies went together on a hunting trip and both took it what would the law be? Since they would be guiding each other instead of themselves. She said... well I guess that is O.K.
So there you have it, get a buddy, both take the cheap and easy guide test through the mail, and guide each other.
 
I have thought about that also and I don't think it works. A guide has to work for a licensed outfitter, you can't just get a guide license and start guiding hunters. You and your buddy would be receiving compensation from the other because you are providing a service and receiving a sevice in return. Maybe you couldn't be cited for a wilderness law violation but you could be cited for outfitting without a license.

Kind of strange though that you would be qualified to work for an outfitter and guide hunters and ensure their safety in the wilderness but wouldn't be qualified to hunt by yourself.
 
Why would ya even think about breaking the law just cause of the fine amount?Might not be the best law in the hunting community but it is the law so i think they should give the MAX to everyone caught breaking it. HUNT ETHICALLY
 
but don't you think the law is part of the reason Clause peak is so crowded during deer season?
 
the wilderness law is a just another example NR tax paying US citizens getting the shaft. the federal government owns and maintains the vast majority of public land in the state of WY and not one $$ of state revenue goes to grow the animals on the Fed land.
start flamin me!!
 
Almost every state has something of this nature. Get over it.

How about the Nevada Guide Deer tags?

How about the New Mexico 12% Outfitter set aside?

How about the Montana Outfitters tags?

How about the Utah highest bidder wins tags?

How about transferable tags in a couple states?

If a nonresident wants to hunt the Wyoming wilderness then hire an outfitter.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-10-09 AT 07:19AM (MST)[p]How about we just get rid of all those welfare programs mentioned above? What would happen if the outfitters/guides tried pulling this crap with the resident tags?
 
COSA, wmm, and others,

Please, dont lump all WY residents in with the likes of WyoXtec. I also apologize for the idiocy that some of the other Wyoming residents have expressed on this thread.

I'm a Wyoming resident and I agree 100% with what you guys are saying.

Pointing out the outfitter/landowner welfare policies of the surrounding states does not justify the outfitter welfare in Wyoming.

All these programs are damaging to the sport, in particular to the average working class hunter, no way to look at it any differently.
 
I just drew a tag in what everyone says is griz country, guys who hunt there always see griz. Funny thing is it is not wilderness. Which one of you WY guys is in charge of teaching griz what a wilderness sign are and to stay in that area so all us udmb NR are safe?

I personally like the AK law, I (living in OH) can guide a NR for brown bear but I cannot hunt (brown bear) as a NR? Are you freakin kiddin me??????????????????????????????

Ironic because if I had a quarter for every resident of Wy (or AK) that I had to explain water treatment too, draw odds, diamox, weather, GPS etc too (yes I know not griz habits) I could easily afford to just hire a guide and go shooting.

These laws are totally insane.
 
wmm--
The State and It's F&G biologists are responsible for the fish and game in Wyoming, except Y'stone Park. (exception-wolf and griz)
The Wildlife of Wyo is lawed as property of the State until you bullet kills it, then it's your responsibility.
The Fed. Gov. DOES NOT maintain the wildlife in the State, nor have they ever exhibited the ability to, that is WHY there are well-qualified STATE G&F biologists(every game warden has to be a biologist to start with, by degree and by law) to do the job, and Wyo won't let any others think they can, with good historical back-up keeping the laden slugs away, or just in Jackson, nowadays.
Buzz, Don--had your money to ##### like a trollup with, I'd think the same. But then again, NOT. I'm side-by-side with Non-Special Any-Darn-Thing, and don't believe for a minute any Non is ever thinking out for the best for Wyo's wildlife future, y'all are Case And Point!


Rump
 
Rump,

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I believe that is the most thoughtful pro guide/wilderness law argument I've had the pleasure to read. You have really opened my eyes to how wrong I was on this issue.
 
Well, regardless of my own personal thoughts on the subject, I must look out for my fellow Wyomingites from time to time, be they Elk, Muley, Toad or Outfitter.

Rump
 
How about a "Just a armed camping trip" because that is all a hunting trip is UNTIL YOU KILL something.
Love horse packing in for those "armed camping trips"
What I'm just fishing yes sir just fishing.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
 

Similar threads

J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_3016.jpeg
icDsLyarTriMeATRhYoKsw_thumb_4a03-DeNoiseAI-standard.jpg
DF10775C-62C3-4C04-8E75-EAAAF3605237.jpeg
42023C5C-0712-49C7-B860-33F29775861D.jpeg
20211024_124612.jpg
IMG_4973.mov
IMG_7756 copy.jpg
393.jpeg
Screenshot_20211110-071525_Gallery.jpg
879F0738-90E0-4ECD-919D-0CEF95548478.jpeg
Big Buck
Screenshot_20231104_211256_Gallery.jpg
Back
Top Bottom