How many resident hunters...................

Do you guys always answer a question with a question?

Dwalton - the question was asked in the first post; How many resident hunters are there in the state of Wyoming?

Utah400Elk - I am sending out a letter in which I reference the number of resident hunters in the state of Wyoming. I asked the WY G&F Department for that number two weeks ago. It is a number I would have thought they knew. Do you think the state in which you reside could tell you how many resident hunters they have?
 
Smokestick:

I am a Wyoming resident. I am sure my state is able to answer the question about resident hunters. Now to my question, why do you want to know? I am VERY nervous about anybody associated with SFW. Is Wyoming SFW supporting another push for outfitter set aside? Transferable landowner tags? A resident point system? I lived in Utah too long and have seen what certain people have done to hurt the resident hunters. I would HATE to see Wyoming follow anything Utah has done.
 
Utah400Elk,

I answered your question in my last post. I am sending a letter out to Wyoming resident hunters. I was shocked that no one has been able to provide me with that answer. I thought they would know that answer off the top of their head. I am simply trying to obtain the number as I reference it in my letter. You should know that Utah has NO bearing on Wyoming. Our Board of Directors is 100% in charge of WY SFW. WY SFW never supported set aside for outfitters or anyone else. In fact, WY SFW was the only group this year which opposed a bill (SF0063 - Game & Fish-Donation of hunting licenses) which now allows for transferable licenses. They may try and reference it as a donated license; however, Wyoming's past director referred to the bill as a transferable license three separate times during testimony. Unfortunately, that bill passed. I expressed my concern that it would set the stage for other users groups to come back and request transfers for some other cause.
A resident point system was once again defeated. WY SFW has stated that our membership is split very similar to that which the WY G&F Department has shown in past polls or surveys. I DO NOT want Wyoming to mange wildlife like Utah does, we don't have any where near the problems that Utah is wrestling with in regards to wildlife management. Wyoming's wildlife challenges are unique to Wyoming. I would not advise Utah how to manage its wildlife resources either as I no longer know enough about their issues and/or challenges.
 
So after that last long spiel to Utah400elk you still didn't say what the letter is all about that you are intending to send out to resident hunters. So now I'll also ask you a question. What is the big secret you're not telling upfront here on the Forum? It sure isn't a letter just to say Howdy!!!
 
And why is that? I can not simply get on here to say Howdy?

I just think it is amazing that Wyoming didn't have that number readily available. You would think that is something they would be able to give any day of the week, no?

Secrets are so fun........, I guess you will have to wait and see what is in the letter.

This Forum is sooo much fun.
 
After all of the same BS here on this thread and you SFW people wonder why so many of us have a negative attitude toward your organization!!! From an outsider's point of view, it appears that you guys can't do anything upfront and out in the open!!!
 
It is always an agenda with you SFW types.

I am regretting moving to wyo because of the big $FW machine.

How long before this 'big secret letter' will be sent?

Robb
 
Utah400Elk,

You took the words right out of my mouth. That was precisely why I asked a question for smoke's question. I am a WYO resident, also. There is always an agenda with SFW. To borrow a movie line: "They're the Devil, Bobby!"
 
"WY SFW never supported set aside for outfitters or anyone else."

That is a complete mis-truth (hate to call it a lie).
 
You guys are truly amazing.

Please Deer, I had more respect for you than that but I guess everything changes thru time.

SFW is so bad. How has WY SFW hurt anyone or caused harm to anyone?

I am really interested in hearing your responses....
 
Smokestick:

When I was a Utah resident, I remember Wyoming SFW supporting a proposal to set 1/2 of non-resident tags aside for the non-residents who use an outfitter. Is my memory wrong? I can do a search on MM for the thread if that helps? You also say SFW Wyoming is not involved in any other state's decision when it comes to their wildlife? Then why do you try and defend Utah's Expo Tags? Again, I came from an SFW state and I hope Wyoming SFW stays the way it is, nothing more than a side note in a GREAT state!
 
Why don't you quit asking questions and quit trying to put it back on us! That's always the way it is when someone has something to hide. Talk about everything but what is really being talked about. Now answer the question as to what the letter is about or don't expect anything but more negative criticism of your outfit!!! Can't you see that you are just causing more harm to your organization by putting up the posts you are on this thread alone?
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-27-11 AT 08:11PM (MST)[p]Well just for fun I did a quick search and found this:

"I was attending the G&F Commission meetings when the Task Force met to discuss several different issues. One of those was a proposal from the Wyoming Outfitter and Guides Association. The proposal was presented to the SFW WY Board of Directors at our meeting in June.

Their proposal has nothing to do with resident hunters, nor does it create any so called set aside licenses. Their proposal calls for establishing a pool of licenses taken from the non-resident quota that is available for outfitted hunts. The license fees would be market driven and vary based upon demand. It sounded a lot like the system being used in Montana.

The following is SFW WY's position statement regarding what was presented to our Board in June:

SFW WY supports efforts to stabilize our outfitting industry by working to resolve issues dealing specifically with non-resident license allocations. SFW WY believes that it is absolutely necessary to resolve this issue in such a fashion as to protect Wyoming?s hunting heritage. Protecting our hunting heritage includes our outfitting heritage as well. Wyoming should support efforts to improve tourism by increasing the ability of our non-resident guests to better plan for their next Great Wyoming Adventure. Taking measures to stabilize the boom ?vs.- bust cycle that now takes place in the outfitting industry will greatly improve the outcome for many of our non-residents hunters and enhance their outdoor experiences in Wyoming.

Please consider our support as you evaluate and explore this option before you.

Thanks for your time and dedication in protecting Wyoming?s Wonderful Wildlife Resources.

Respectfully,

Robert Wharff
Executive Director
Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife of Wyoming

aka; SMOKESTICK"

Posted on July 18 2005. Smokestick, I think in July 2005 SFW Wyoming DID support an outfitter/guide set aside! That is one of the main problems I have with SFW. They say one thing one day then deny it the next. You can dress a pig any way you want but it is still a pig! Please explain how I am wrong Smokestick.
 
dollar to a dog turd the letter asks for money.....


JB
497fc2397b939f19.jpg
 
Hope they send one to me with a postage paid envelope. I'll tape it to a box filled with rocks so they can pick up the tab...
 
Utah400Elk,

I can send you a copy of the actual letter if you want one.

The position taken by WY SFW was to stabilize Wyoming's outfitting industry by working to resolve issues dealing specifically with non-resident license allocations. We continue to see areas where the outfitting industry is becoming destabilized as our resources are dwindling and hunting is on its way out; hunters are being replaced by wolves and bears. Areas of our state (Wyoming) continue to see shrinking opportunities on public lands for elk and moose hunting. Meanwhile more and more private lands are being leased to outfitters and hunters are being excluded from there as well. Perhaps something should have been done to address these problems before they get totally out of control. All of the naysayers have not even attempted to offer any solution, at least WY SFW is trying to resolve problems that no one else wants to face. Had we been able to continue the discussions may be something good would have come out of them; however, what have you got now. It has been almost 6 years since that failed effort. Have things gotten better or worse?

"SFW WY believes that it is absolutely necessary to resolve this issue in such a fashion as to protect Wyoming?s hunting heritage. Protecting our hunting heritage includes our outfitting heritage as well."

How can we protect our hunting heritage without maintaining a stable outfitting industry? Outfitting has long been a part of our hunting tradition in this state, no? So how would you handle this issue or any other?

The fact remains, it is easier to set and throw stones at those trying to make a difference than offer an alternative. I see it every day. Who attended that last G&F Commission meeting where their Strategic Plan for 2012 -2016 was presented and approved by the Commission. Who even bothered to read it and see what it entailed? There was a total of 2 people from the public at the meeting. I know who was there and what was discussed, yet you want to bring up a failed position?

As I stated earlier, name where WY SFW has caused any harm or hurt our hunting heritage? And I am still waiting for a number from the WY G&F. After all, that was the purpose of his post.

Throw all the rocks you want to, I still believe the threat to our hunting heritage is serious enough to put up with insults from those which despise SFW.
 
Smokestick:

On July 21, 2005, in the same Post you wrote "There are approximately 7200 elk licenses available or set aside for non-resident hunters. The proposal is to reserve 2900 of the 7200 for non-residents which desire to obtain outfitter services. Their application will require that they have a licensed/registered outfitters signature in order to be eligible. Last year approximately 3100 elk hunters went with an outfitter, of those approximately 10% were residents of Wyoming. Approximately 4300 elk license will remain available for non-resident hunters." SFW Wyoming supported this proposal! SFW Wyoming supported a outfitter/guide set aside! Explain how I am wrong.

You also said "WY SFW never supported set aside for outfitters or anyone else." In post # 8.

So in 2005 "The position taken by WY SFW was to stabilize Wyoming's outfitting industry by working to resolve issues dealing specifically with non-resident license allocations." Which was supporting "2900 tags reserved for non-residents which desire to obtain outfitter services." However in 2011 "WY SFW never supported set aside for outfitters".

Again please explain this to me. Could you also tell us why SFW Wyoming wants the numbers? If you are going to do a mass mail you could save a few bucks and post it on MM.
 
Utah400Elk,
Every Wyoming resident owes you a big pat on the back
The biggest problem we made in Utah was not having enough guys like you staying involved and calling out thous
"BLOWING SMOKE OUT THERE STICK"
on these exact issues.Keep up the good work
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-27-11 AT 10:33PM (MST)[p]Unbelievable, SFW wants to stabilize the oufitting industry? How about this, don't worry about the outfitting industry, in this little one horse town where I reside there are half a dozen outfitters at least, and if they all went broke and had to get real jobs, I wouldn't lose a minutes sleep. In fact the hunting would be better for the rest of us, and maybe all the illegal trails they built all over would eventually grow over. I almost went to a SFW dinner a couple years ago, man that would have been a mistake. I guess its about time to start writing letters to the Casper star tribune and some of the other papers.
 
Our position was to stabilize the outfitting industry. You keep stating that WY SFW supported setting tags aside for Outfitters. What was supported was stabilizing the industry. The Outfitters proposed the system I explained as you quoted July 21, 2005. The devil is in the details and no where in the official position statement did WY SFW ever support set aside licenses. You are only seeing the preliminary discussions and have no idea what could have been the result of our efforts. So I will ask it once more; Where has WY SFW caused any harm or hurt our hunting heritage? The issue didn't resolve itself and we are now seeing additional elk areas around Cody, WY possibly being forced into quota areas because no one wanted to admit Wyoming has a problem.

I see no reason to answer your question until you answer mine. You keep bringing up something that didn't happen. So WY SFW tried to fix a problem, one which still remains today I might add. And what is your solution? You do not have one do you?
 
SMOKESTICK should run for government office the way he talks out of both sides of his mouth, LOL! If this is the way all the higher ups in SFW are, it's no wonder most people are badmouthing the whole organization. Keep up the good work Utah, as you've obviously exposed a liar and there is no way he's going to get out of this one no matter how many things he tries to bring up to throw the thread off track!!!
 
"Please Deer, I had more respect for you than that but I guess everything changes thru time."

You would think you $FW types would just avoid posting any of your agenda layden BS.

I do not want $FW screwing up my years of saving and purchasing to move to Wyoming like $FW has screwed up everything in Utardville---well except for the fat wallet and politician crowd...

All my Utah earned money goes to Wyoming now and if $FW screws up Wyo then all my Utah/Wyo earned money will be going to another state...

How is that Wyo wolf hunting going?

Oh thats right--it is Idaho/Montana's fault Wyo can not hunt wolves not the behind the back crap-O-la of $FW....the BIG Wolf Hero's-------some day way out there.....

"Please Deer, I had more respect for you than that but I guess everything changes thru time."

Robb
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-28-11 AT 06:36AM (MST)[p]Robb---Me thinks you speaketh the truth! As far as his "ignorance is bliss" comment, I think he definitely described himself and it fits him perfectly. How can anybody that is making statements like he is on this thread, only to have them refuted with what was actually stated at the meetings referred to, then come right back on here and deny it? Answer---See post #28, LOL!!!
 
Okay, all the hurtful stuff being thrown around has caused me to spill the beans on my plan to control the minds of Wyoming residents. The only thing standing in my way is that I need to know the exact number of resident hunters in order to mix the proper amount of KooLAide in our drinking water. You know too much of that stuff and they will become like Ann Coulter, too little and well they will remain in their blissful state of DeNile.

Oh yeah, not one person has been able to identify where WY SFW has caused anyone or anything harm!

Keep throwing stones, but be sure to have someone else drink your water first; otherwise you may start throwing rocks at each other.
 
Hey Smokestick! Does Don or any of the top brass in SWF read what you write or post out on the net? If they do and aren't asking you to put a halt to it, then it's no wonder the overall organization is taking all these hits. All we have asked here on this thread is what the letter will be about and you've done everything you can to avoid answering it. You immediately got the answer to your resident numbers question and then have just continued to instigate and create problems for yourself and the SFW on this thread. I guess this is going to be the next big stir or flap created by SFW now that the odds for the Expo tags have finally been posted! I have a gut feeling that one of these days people are going to start looking closely at the SFW books and I will not be surprised if they find a very low percentage of monies taken in is being directed towards wildlife and habitat like everyone is being told.
 
Well, I was given a number that exceeds what was predicted. It appears that the number of resident Wyoming hunters, drum roll please.........

Dramatic pause..............

Can you fill the excitement building?????????

According to the WY G&F Department, there are 82,580 hunters. I am positive that this number will fluctuate over time but it is higher than I thought, as well as others which proffered a guess.

Thanks to those few which attempted to answer the question I asked at the start of this post.

TOPGUN - You probably need to go back and read my posts. It is obvious that you either didn't read them or didn't catch the part about Wyoming SFW being independent of Utah. Don probably doesn't even come hear anymore as he is welcomed so much for his efforts leading SFW. I am glad to hear that the Expo odds have been posted but I should mention that Wyoming has nothing to do with the Expo either. You are lucky I am in a good mood or I would really tell you what I think.

For the record, no one has been able to state any where the damage or harm caused by WY SFW.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-28-11 AT 03:39PM (MST)[p]I have read the back and forth posts on this subject. I had a long telephone conversation with Smokestick a month or two ago about all the legislation being proposed to solve the wolf problem. We also discussed hunting in Wyoming. I enjoyed the conversation. I have also exchanged emails with Topgun about hunting and various other issues. He is a pleasant fellow who loves to hunt and to discuss hunting. We share the advance of age and its potential affect on what we love.

I don't belong to SFW. I no longer belong to the MDF. My NRA membership will be up for renewal in a few months. I am not certain I will renew. Until recently, all these groups seemed somewhat benign to me. Now they represent to me a lot of bickering, rancor and a little greed. No one ever seems to be on the same page. Fundraising seems to take precedence over everything else. The interests of the outfitters or the well healed hunter is not something I care much about. I have met good and bad outfitters and guides. I have been a guide in Montana. I feel no compulsion to protect their livliehood. In some instances, what they charge for a guided hunt is obscene. Well healed hunters may do some good with the purchase of special tags. Do I respect their hunting prowess or the trophy animals they kill? Not much.
My no longer wishing to be involved in all this would suggest to some that I may be part of the problem. All I know is the back and forth is getting old. Feel free to flame me for my comments.
 
SMOKESTICK---I understand that you are separate entities. However, you both are SFW organizations that people associate with each other and if one screws up it is just human nature to associate good with good or bad with bad. You still haven't mentioned what the letter you are sending to resident hunters is all about and that, in and of itself, makes everyone wonder what the heck is going on when there is already a lot of disenchantment with the SFW as a whole, especially the Utah entity for not living up to their pledge on posting tag odds. If you guys don't run transparent organizations in this day and age IMHO you are going to fail. You made statements earlier in this thread in regards to the stance your organization took on outfitter sponsored tags, etc., and it was disproved by Utahelk400 when he showed actual statements you had previously made that were just the opposite. I have never been in favor of outfitter sponsored tags and dang sure am not happy about needing a licensed guide or a resident friend to take me into the wilderness areas if I want to hunt them! The outfitters don't need any subsidies from anyone and if they can't make it by running a good operation and getting repeat business, as well as other business by word of mouth because they run a good operation, then they should fail just like any other business.

mightyhunter---I'm sure not going to flame you because I think after reading your second paragraph that we definitely share the same opinions on a number of things, including outfitters and subsidies. I also can't argue the "advance of age we share" comment either, LOL!
 
Plus when SFW-Wyo shows up @ the big power point last year and you are in on all the conference calls with SFW-----

It makes disassociation a little hard to believe....just sayin'...

Kinda like the gas station on the corner and the same name gas station a mile away saying they are seperate--- not part of a regional gas station chain.

Is your next 'thread' going to be titled .......

Mailing Address's of Wyo Resident Hunters.......?

Robb

PS--TG we have learned over the many years of $FW debates to hurry and 'print' statements posted by them.....
 
I've been resident hunter for 12 years here now and for Smokestick's info I have more hunting opportunites now than back in 98...this is what I'm hunting this year...GEN MULE DEER, WHITETAIL TYPE 3, ANTELOPE, GEN ELK, 1/2 price COW/CALF ELK....
So I can kill 1 Mule DEER BUCK, 1 Whitetail BUCK, I Buck ANTELOPE, 1 BULL ELK, 1 COW ELK...and can ARCHERY HUNT IT ALL ALSO...
 
Yep, and we are lucky because if he had been in a bad mood we would have really heard a lot more! Thank God for small favors, LOL!!!
 
Mightyhunter - You are correct in your assessment of the climate on this blog. The bickering, rancor and greed are very disgusting to me as well. I am certain that some of the guys flinging mud around about SFW have some justification; however, I am proud of what WY SFW has accomplished. SFW has a similar foundation in every state but with various priorities and objectives. All of those priorities and objectives are set by each states respective leadership. Everyone on this site can critique the position WY SFW took to stabilize Wyoming's Outfitting Industry. No one has all of the facts the decision was based upon, nor does anyone know what WY SFW had hoped to achieve. I know that there are areas in Wyoming where too many outfitters are taking too many hunters but there is no one to blame except the process we currently have today. It is a very complicated problem and there are no easy answers or solutions. However, we should all understand that problems usually do not fix themselves. If cooler heads would have prevailed, I believe we could of had some gains that helped everyone protect our hunting heritage. Like it or not, Outfitting has played a huge role in Wyoming's history. Hopefully, Sportsmen can understand that the State of Wyoming assesses the highest license fee on Outfitters. It costs less to be licensed as a doctor, a lawyer, etc. While that may not matter to many of you that do not outfit, it is the only recognized industry sportsmen have. We can set back and allow our Outfitting Industry to be destroyed just like many did with the Timber Industry. I happen to believe that the Outfitting Industry is under attack. Once they are destroyed, it will be much easier to defeat hunting, fishing and trapping. We have a common enemy, and it isn't outfitters. Yes there are both good & bad outfitters; just as there are both good and bad sportsmen. Utah400Elk was able to locate past post which describe what the Outfitters were seeking. All you have is our position statement which stated that we supported stabilizing the Outfitting Industry. Would the outfitters have gotten everything they wanted? Probably not, but for all the condemnation WY SFW has received based on our position statement, no one knows what it was that we would have sought as well, for sportsmen in general. That opportunity is now lost and may never present itself again.

TOPGUN - What pledges has WY SFW not fulfilled? Hopefully, you get my point. You and everyone else on this site can be mad at Utah for not fulfilling their pledge but please do not hang that around any other SFW state. Mighthyhunter seems to think highly of you and I will defer to his assessment. I apologize for feeding the rancor. This post was not intended to digress the way it did, and I share some of the blame for that happening. Hopefully, you have read all of this post as I attempted to further explain that you are judging WY SFW will only part of the facts in regards to our position to stabilize the Outfitting Industry. If you want to discuss it further, let me know.

PleaseDear - I don't really know what big power point presentation you are referring to but I assume it was the Expo. WY SFW did have a both to demonstrate support of the event. I was there until Friday afternoon but then I headed home as I had a banquet/fundraiser in Gillette, WY on Saturday. Several of the SFW states were in attendance. I asked you to call me about discussions around the Expo but you never responded. Just to make it absolutely clear, WY SFW has seen no direct funds from the Expo. The only exception would be if we were fortunate enough to have something placed in one of the auctions or raffles on the floor of the Expo hall. To the best of my knowledge none of the other SFW states have received anything either. The Expo is clearly Utah SFW's baby. They took all of the risks and they reap all of the benefits. There has been no conference calls between WY SFW and Utah. Although, I hope that changes, it is up to more people than just me. All SFW states get painted with the same broad brush. I would prefer to differentiate between the states and want no part in another national organization. I have already played to smaller part of the greater whole. I believe the SFW model is the best out there; however, too many continue to assume that Utah is over all of the SFW states. Simply not true. The Foundation of each state organization is similar but that is about it. You state that you now live in Wyoming. Maybe you should get involved with WY SFW and help make us even better and stronger than we are today? A lot of WY SFW's critics are not even members and assume the worst without ever trying to find out what we are truly doing. Oh, Robb, I already have the addresses for the resident hunters. WY SFW purchased the 2009 list from the WY G&F
Department. I had them clean it up so that only one letter per household will receive the letter we are sending out. Just wanted to stretch our budget as best we can.

Longun - You are indeed fortunate. I have been living in Wyoming now for over 11 years. It really is an amazing place to live. My family wasn't as you were but we still drew three buck antelope tags. This will be my 15 year old daughters first big game hunt. She was actually excited about getting to go hunting with her Dad and brother. We do have problems looming in our state though. I am very concerned about events taking place in the Cody region. I am fearful that if it all goes to a quota system, the dominoes will begin to fall. Wyoming could in the very near future be forced to go quota statewide for bull elk. That will certainly have an impact on us all; residents & non-residents alike. Congratulations on what appears to be a full hunting season, just within Wyoming.

Once again, Mightyhunter, I apologize for helping this thread digress from its intended purpose. Hopefully, others will follow suit. I do strongly believe you lead by example.
 
Good grief!
I thought that the "special price" license application (that Wyoming instituted some years ago) was for those that wanted to spend more, for a better chance to draw and perhaps, hire an outfitter was for helping the outfitters.
Add that to the law that non-residents can't hunt "wilderness" without a guide. Isn't that enough for the outfitters?
Seems like someone wants to gather support from residents to enact something that affects non-resident hunters who really have no vote, voice or power other than apply or don't apply.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-29-11 AT 12:56PM (MST)[p]
That post sure didn't say much of anything, especially as to what the letter you are sending out is about that you are playing hush hush with. Everyone, just by human nature, has to figure that some segment of hunting is going to get the shaft when you will not spit it out!!! Why did you come on and ask the initial question of the public when now you have just stated that you purchased a list from the F&G with all the resident hunters addresses. Can't you count? If you have that information direct from F&G, then why in haydes are you asking the public? Again I will state that when you are not upfront on stuff like this the only thing people can think is NEGATIVE vibes. You keep fumbling around stating your SFW had a position and made a positive statement to stabilize outfitters when they came up with a proposal on tags. If you didn't, and still haven't, put that proposal out in writing, then why would you not figure that everyone thinks SFW backed what the outfitters came up with? From reading the old post that utahelk400 posted, it sure appears like that was the case and that you were backing them. You stated that the outfitters are under attack, etc. Other than us nonresidents being POd about the wilderness restriction, which is nothing but a subsidy when I can go in there even during hunting season without a weapon, what attack are you referring to? The only other thing I, and many others are upset about, is the millions of acres that has been removed from our possible access without paying tons of money. The biggest outfitter in the state has a 100,000 acrea ranch tied up near where I hunt and wants over $4,000 for a 5 day hunt. I go out for 2 or 3 weeks on a DIY and don't spend $1000 for all expenses in the same general area with good success, so don't tell me the outfitters need any help from me, you, SFW, or anyone else!!! What, other than screwing another hunting segment like is already on the books with the nonresident wilderness restriction, are you trying to accomplish. There are enough friggin outfitters that if 50% went under, IMHO, there would still be more than enough good ones to seek out if someone wants one. I don't know why with all the other problems that an organization such as yours should be addressing that you have taken the time on trying to help outfitters unless there is a hidden agenda that only a small segment of hunters would benefit from. In a nutshell, if you guys were out in the open with EVERYTHING you want to accomplish and how you intend to accomplish it, there would not be rancor and threads like this on the Forums. This thread is getting long with basically everyone on here not saying anything positive about your organization. Open up about this letter to begin with and that attitude might change. Continue to beat around the bush and talk about everything else but what the thread started out asking and you will continue to receive negative posts IMHO. You may be the most honest guy representing a great organization, but if everything you are doing, including this letter, is on the up and up, then please open up and appraise us as to what is going on. You obviously haven't learned a thing from the odds fiasco the Utah SFW created for itself and you are now doing the same thing with this secret letter BS!!! It will probably turn out that this letter will have nothing to do with what we are talking about. If that's the case, it will still show the mistrust many have with the SFW organizations overall for not being out in the open on everything you do.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-29-11 AT 12:36PM (MST)[p]Smokestick:

Spin all you want but I don't think it is going to work. "All you have is our position statement which stated that we supported stabilizing the Outfitting Industry." "All we have"! Really? What I have is Wyo SFW?s position on a WYOGA'S proposal. Now let's look at how Wyo SFW attempted to "support stabilizing the Outfitter Industry." It was by ?by working to resolve issues dealing specifically with non-resident license allocations.? We both know you were talking about set aside tags for outfitters. Wyo SFW's supported their proposal for a set a side of tags. There is no way around that one. You are stuck with your statements.

"Utah400Elk was able to locate past post which describe what the Outfitters were seeking." Again no need for the half-truth. I found a post wherein Wyo SFW supported a proposal by the WYOGA'S for set aside tags.

If Wyo SFW is independent from Utah SFW then why do you defend the expo and the Utah SFW decisions? I have been involved in several Conservation Organizations. My dealings with SFW have proven to me that they can't be trusted. I would have a more respect for you if you could say that Wyo SFW decision to support the WYOGA'S proposal for a set aside of tags was wrong than to say you supported their effort but not the set aside.

There always seem to be secrets surrounding SFW. This was your chance (and still is) to stop the secrets. Why not save some money and post the letter on MM instead of sending the letters to all Wyoming hunters? Just FYI, I will post the letter on this site as soon as I get it!

You also said "but for all the condemnation WYO SFW has received based on our position statement, no one knows what it was that we would have sought as well, for sportsmen in general. That opportunity is now lost and may never present itself again." Here is your chance...Tell us what Wyo SFW was trying to seek in their support of the WYOGA'S proposal for set aside tags.

I will tell you what I saw in Wyo SFW's support of the WYOGA'S proposal. A first step in the direction of a Utah style tag sale (all for conservation of course). I would be willing to bet that if the WYOGA'S proposal for set asides had passed then they (WYOGA) would have supported a percentage of tags set aside for conservation. Any takes on a Utah style 5% set aside for conservation organizations?

You have repeatedly asked "name where WY SFW has caused any harm or hurt our hunting heritage?" That is a very catchy slogan for Wyo SFW?You can't PROVE we have caused harm or hurt Wyoming?s hunting heritage. I think you should run with that one.

Smokestick, you and I will probably never see eye to eye on conservation or SFW but I willing to extend the olive branch and meet with you. You can explain how Wyo SFW is different than Utah SFW. I would offer the suggestion that you STOP trying to defend Utah SFW to set yourself apart.

For the record, I think the non-resident Wilderness law is a joke. It was not safe to allow me to hunt in the wilderness one one day and the next it was because my zip code chnaged? This is an outfitter set aside. Smokestick, can you even agree with that?
 
Smomestick:

I would also argue that non-resident hunters are a importanat part of Wyoming's hunting heritage. Do you agree with that?
 
If WY SFW wasn't called WY SFW would it change your opinion of them? If so, isn't that guilt by association?
 
G14---Not if I found out they were running the show the same way it's run under SFW!!! It appears the basic structure is the same in the various states according to his post, even though they are aeparate. That does make it a lot easier to be negative, as I stated in an earlier psot, but I go by what I am told or find out by various means. In this case, it's what I'm not being told that really bothers me and, I think, many others.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-29-11 AT 03:13PM (MST)[p]G14:

If that question is for me...then NO! It's guilt by denial. Smokestick will not even admit that Wyo SFW supported the set aside for outfitters even though it is very obvious he did. They can call themselves whatever they want. When they act like the other group, defend the other groups decisions and actions then they are standing up to be counted with them IMO. You also can't just throw out that they are from the same parent organization. Wyo SFW has done nothing to show they are not the same Utah product just with the ?Wyoming? thrown into their name but it can be shown that they are backing Utah SFW at EVERY turn.

Why won't Smokestick just post the letter for everybody to see? He could just end this, turn over a new leaf by being open and transparent. Show us Wyo SFW is different than Utah SFW!
 
Wow!

First off TOPGUN - This thread was started to discuss "How many resident hunters there are in Wyoming". I did purchase a 2009 mailing list from the WY G&F Department. It contains 40,487 names, addresses, etc. I asked for the number because in the letter I am sending out I referenced that number (not knowing what the actual number was) and wanted to make sure that my number was correct. The mailing list I purchased is less than the total number because some licensees live in at the same address and we wanted to eliminate duplication. I never answered the question about the letter because that was not the intent of this thread. I just wondered how many people wondered the same thing, so I posted the question. I personally thought the number would be between 60,000 & 70,000 but wanted to see what others thought. The first two responses seemed to understand the purpose of this thread, you can see that some have turned it into something entirely different now. I tried to answer the accusations to the best of my ability. It is difficult to explain all matters of detail from something that was proposed in 2005; however, I did try to explain it.

Utah400Elk - I would gladly accept your offering of the olive branch. PM me and let me know where you would like to meet and when. You might be surprised to learn that I am not the enemy and likewise, I may be able to learn something from you as well. I haven't seen a need to post the letter on MM yet but I will when the time is right. It is nothing secret or controversial, it is simply a membership drive that we are getting ready to mail. I would also agree that non-resident hunters are a significant part of Wyoming's Hunting Heritage. However, about 98% of WY SFW members are Wyoming residents so that does focus our attention more on resident issues.

I will continue to state it as I believe it is important; no one has been able to show where WY SFW has caused harm or damage to our Hunting Heritage. That is the number one question I always ask myself whenever WY SFW is asked to take a position.

I do look forward to meeting with Utah400Elk and anyone else that would like to talk about ways in which WY SFW can improve our image or that which is perceived by the public. We may need to agree to disagree on some points but I have never been one to shy away from a good debate.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-29-11 AT 06:28PM (MST)[p]We have told you how to improve your image so many times it's ridiculous for God's sake. If the letter is just going to be regarding a membership drive, then why in the he** didn't you just say that by post number 8? It was like you were looking to bait and goad people into responding and that's exactly what happened by your not answering a simple questionn. No, you had to keep spouting the same BS, a share of it which was a proven lie by utahelk400! Your continual posts of the same old stuff are getting old and not helping you or your organization. I feel like I'm dealing with a friggin politician who just keeps yapping and doesn't say anything of value. Also, every politician tries to blame the other side just like you are blaming us for asking a simple question that could have been answered and the thread ended with a simple second post with an answer by yourself! Incidentally, us nonresidents are where the Wyoming F&G and many other state game agencies get the bulk of their operational money, even though we don't get anywhere near the percentage of tags that the residents do for significantly lower fees. I have somewhat of a problem with that, but it's not going to get any better and all I can hope is that it doesn't get worse. As long as we get a fair shake, and I think Wyoming is about as good as it gets compared to a lot of the other western states, I'm a happy camper.
 
Why did you assume that the letter had to contain something sinister?

I do realize that non-residents provide a lot of funding for the WY G&F Department. I am equally glad that you stated non-residents are treated "as good as it gets compared to other western states". Wyoming does provide a lot of opportunity, more so then some states.

You still haven't identified where WY SFW has caused any harm or damage to Wyoming's Hunting Heritage.
 
I haven't identified any because I don't know that the SFW has done anything to harm or damage Wyoming YET! Do you get my drift with that short response? It is what looks like MIGHT happen when a group isn't open and upfront that scares all of us, including the letter you were so hesitant to talk about! I can't make my explanation any clearer than that.
 
'morning Bob,

If you are going to send me ---

some great big lengthy blah-blah-blah----PM-----


Try and send it to the right person----

You sent it to someone else.....

From what I understand---quite entertaining...$FW--'Walk On Water' type stuff.....blah--blah--blah....

Robb
 
PleaseDear,

It would appear as though you are correct. I sent it to Russ. I do mix you guys up from time to time.

That would explain why you never called me.

My wife tells me that I think I am perfect. I tell her that I already have plenty of people who point out my many faults.
 
"SMOKESTICK---I understand that you are separate entities. However, you both are SFW organizations that people associate with each other and if one screws up it is just human nature to associate good with good or bad with bad."

I don't know if they are really separate entities or not. Maybe the Wyoming Chapter is just copying the business model because the Utah group is so successful at making money for themselves.

I'm a resident of New Mexico, but hunt Wyoming and Montana a lot. In New Mexico and Montana, the trend seems to be slowly moving away from the outfitter set-asides. I hope Wyoming picks up on the trend.
-- Bob
 
Wyoming doesn't have outfitter set asides, the majority has always been against them, thats the whole point of this thread. Wyoming SFW backed set asides in Wyoming some years ago, and I for one haven't forgot how they went against the majority of Wyoming sportsmen, they lost, but sadly it looks as though they are gearing up again.
 
Smoke
So now the SFW backed the outfitter set aside tags.
How many Deer tags and how many elk tags did they get out of the NR tag pool.( can we get a number here)

Plus they still get to keep the NR widerness law too.
(SFW is against this) Bullshit

Why don't you just put them on Welfare or Unemployment like we do out here for people who can't find work, that could solve some of your problems.
Being a part of SFW is kind like voting for Obama.Lots of promise But little hope.


"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
 
Gator---You lost me on your post when you asked SMOKESTICK how many deer and elk tags the outfitters get. They don't get any tags right now and it should stay that way. The NR Wilderness Law you mentioned is their only subsidy right now and that should go the way of the dodo bird too!
 
TOPGUN,

They also got the special permit tiered license fees as well as the wilderness guide law.

They figured their rich clients would draw more tags in the higher priced pool.

Its worked well in many hunting units for them.

But, all that isnt good enough, they want more...and more...and more.

To top it off, they have people like Bob Wharff and WYSFW working non-stop to see they get it...all to "stabilize" the outfitting industry.

Glad that WYSFW cares about its membership and the average hunter.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-13-11 AT 01:12PM (MST)[p]Thanks Buzz! I didn't know they had anything to do with those higher priced special licenses. Hey, on another note I see you said you and your wife qualified for the newly established Montana ex resident fees they are going to implement. I also heard you drew more licenses than any one guy can fill in a season, but I'll bet you'll do it or die trying, LOL! Congrats!!!
 
Topgun,

In fairness, that MT law does bother me. Even though I'll be a recipient of a screaming deal...I'd of never advocated for it. Its a BS deal that a state legislator pushed through so his kids dont have to pay the full NR price. Of course it was passed by the others as well, but that one should have been squashed.

I wont feel too guilty though, as I've bought right near 10 grand worth of NR hunting licenses in Montana since I moved from there in 2000.
 
Good old fashioned politics from what it sounds like! "You scratch mine and I'll scratch yours" type of BS that we have to live with every day. You might not have been for it, but it sounds like you've given them your fair share of $ since you moved, so what the heck, take advantage of it while it lasts.
 
I don't know if it is something that BuzzH was smoking or if I am misreading your post, but WY SFW had nothing to do with the higher priced licenses. That was something I believe ##### Saddler pushed through before WY SFW even existed.

Keep blasting away at what didn't happen. No one has been able to identify any where WY SFW has caused harm to any one. Like I said before, you are only able to see what was proposed not the final product as too many people thought WY SFW sold them out. The devils is always in the details. Perhaps, if there ever is a next time, you will actually let us attempt to fix the problem.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-13-11 AT 03:23PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-13-11 AT 03:22?PM (MST)

Smokestick,

You arent reading anything right...It wasnt SFW that got the higher priced tags pushed through, it was the Wyoming Guides and Outfitters that did that.

I only accuse WYSFW of what they have done, or attempted to do.

By backing and endorsing the proposal for outfitter set-asides, you did cause harm. It forced groups like the WYBA, WWF, etc. to spend money lobbying against that ridiculous idea. It also cost me some phone calls, time writing letters, time writing emails, etc.

Thats time and effort I should have been using to help wildife as well as ALL hunters, not just those that buy hunts and those that sell them.

There was nothing positive that would have, or will, come from any kind of set-asides for outfitters. Same with transferable landowner tags that you and SFW are also in favor of.

There is simply nothing wrong with the current way licenses are distributed, and it should be left up to each individual whether or not they CHOOSE to hire an outfitter.

WYSFW really messed up big-time on that issue...and exactly why I'd never consider supporting your group, ever. What you endorsed was a real slap in the face to Wyoming sportsmen...and exactly why WYSFW and the WYG&OA got bi tch-slapped back into reality on the issue.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-13-11 AT 07:52PM (MST)[p]Why don't you go write your letter already, LOL!!!

ADDENDUM To SMOKESTICK or BuzzH (if you know): The way I read SF0063 it was to allow a license to be donated to a disabled veteran. Was this bill changed to something else and passed to read something other than what was in the original bill because you are mentioning transferrable licenses, rather than a donated license? I know WWF was for that Bill and you say WYSFW was the only group to testify against it. Please clarify if you can, and if what I stated is true, did your group testify against it in it's original form or what?
 
I noticed you were not in attendance when a bill was passed this year, which for the first time ever, allows for a transferable license. In fact, none of the groups which you mentioned spoke out against the bill. WY SFW was the only group which testified against the bill (SF0063).

You can not say what would have happened because nothing did happened. You were so quick to condemn that you failed to learn what was in the works.
 
I took the time to read through this thread this morning and to be honest I was not really surprised by the smoke and mirrors game that SMOKESTICK is playing. SFW UTAH and SFW WY may very well be two separate legal entities. However, a couple of things are true -- both groups play the same games and both groups are in desperate need of a lesson on public relations.

Incredible.

Hawkeye

Browning A-Bolt 300 Win Mag
Winchester Apex .50 Cal
Mathews Drenalin LD
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-14-11 AT 09:28AM (MST)[p]TOPGUN,

No, the bill remains the same as it was written. While the title states that it is a donation, the fact remains, that for the first time Wyoming now has a transferable license.
During testimony before the House TRW Committee, the former Director of the WY G&F Department referred to it as a transferable license and had to correct himself. I stated, in testimony, that this will set a precedence for transferable licenses, but no other group would speak out because this was for disable veterans.

So do you now support transferable licenses?
 
I have no problem with that Bill and would have no problem if it also included someone who has been diagnosed with a terminal illness, but that would be the limit of my support for such licenses. I am definitely against any attempt to make landowner licenses transferrable or saleable. You may want to pay close attention to the last sentence in the post hawkeye put up because I definitely agree that you guys are your worst enemy and you shoot yourself in the foot an awful lot!
 
TOPGUN,

That is the problem, there already is a section that allows for children with life threatening illnesses to obtain licenses. WY SFW, working in conjunction with Wyoming Wool Growers passed that legislation. In my opinion, it would have been much better to place it under existing statutes rather than set a precedence of allowing licenses to be transferred from one individual to another. They can call it what ever they like but Wyoming now has the means to reissue someone's license to someone else. Tell me if that is a transferable license or not.
 
Wyoming has had "transferable" licenses for years.They are called landowner tags,and they can be transferred to ANYONE in the family,including inlaws.These tags come out of the tag allocation pool as well.People are beginning to find loopholes in this law..
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-14-11 AT 10:41PM (MST)[p]nontypical,

Not true...family members can APPLY for a landowner permit, but whoever draws the permit cannot transer it to another.

Section 44 (3) u and v....under Wyoming law.

Smokestick, its a transferable license, but the donor of the permit cannot profit from the transfer.

Thats a huge difference over the bullchit that happens in NM, NV, UT, and CO.
 
BuzzH - Yes, but it is a transferable license none-the-less.

For all the chit I catch about this stuff I thought it was ironic that WY SFW was the only group which opposed this law. I was too busy with the wolf stuff in DC when it passed out of the Senate. I only had an opportunity to work on it on the House side and not enough time.

As I stated earlier, this does set the precedence for transferable licenses though.

I would also argue that there is always a way for someone to benefit from this. That is one reason why I opposed it. It might not be a direct benefit but indirect benefits are hard to demonstrate but can happen none-the-less.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-15-11 AT 06:38AM (MST)[p]
IMO it doesn't make any difference if it's a "stand alone" Bill, or if was put on as an attachment to an existing Bill. I can't see where any "precedence" has been set when they both involve specific circumstances of poor health of a specific individual. It's not like Johnny or Joe has a cold and we'll get him a great LE tag under this statute! Since any Bill has to stand on it's own, I see no reason to believe that someone (you) could stretch it and say it will lead to rampant license transferrals. I see you stated "I" opposed it, meaning singular. Do you have any type of poll of your membership on issues such as this or other game related Bills to see what the overall membership stance is, or do you just go with a singular "I" oppose it and then represent it as the SFW position? By the way, how's the letter coming along? That was one of the "shoot yourself in the foot" comments I made earlier when you mentioned it and then played a game of cat and mouse with everyone as to what it was about. It will be very interesting to see that letter whenever it does come out because if it's anything other than an attempt to gain new members (ie. regarding licenses, Resident PPs, Outfitters, etc.)it will be a big "shot yourself in the head" letter, instead of the foot, after your posts on here regarding it!!!
 
The precedence it sets is that Wyoming now has a law which allows for a license to be transferred from one individual to another. Who is to say that someone else won't have another great reason to transfer say their bonus points to someone else as they are getting too old to hunt sheep. There are numerous ways for this to spread now, and you criticize me for something that you know little about. No one knows what WY SFW was going to push for as we tried to stabilize the outfitting industry. All is known is what the outfitters wanted.

I used the singular term as in that no one else attempted to oppose this new precedence from being established. Are you now suggesting that a poll would be required to ascertain whether or not Wyoming's sportsmen want to see transferable licenses? Talk about spin and double talk. You are truly too amazing.

Glad to see that you are eagerly awaiting my letter. I am proud that 98% of WY SFW's members are from Wyoming. I hope you know that even though this is the case, as a non-resident you can also join our organization.
 
Who is criticizing you on this and how in haydes can you say that I know nothing about it? You don't know me from a can of paint!!! I might live 1500 miles from Wyoming, but I probably know a lot more that's going on politically and with the F&G in Wyoming than a good share of it's residents! Anyway, all I did was offer my opinion and it differs from yours. Big deal!!! We are in America, are we not? Just because Obama won the Presidency doesn't mean that any others of his ethnicity will ever get there, does it? If something is brought up for consideration in the Legislatre, then it's up to everyone that it might affect to either register their postive or negative feelings and work for or against that Bill. You have just posted more BS with your "No one knows what WYSFW was going to push for as we tried to stabilize the outfitting industry." Nobody knows because you and your organization won't say, just like you didn't want to mention what that letter you're working on is about! "Are you now suggesting that a poll would be required to ascertain whether or not Wyoming's sportsmen want to see transferable licenses?" Why wouldn't that be a logical way to go about deciding as an organization what you will fight for or against? The more you post the more I understand why BUZZH is steadfastly against your organization because if the BS you post is representative of the WYSFW as a whole, then SIR, I'm surprised you have ANY members. Have a good day!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-15-11 AT 01:50PM (MST)[p]Smokestick,

You make it sound as though Wyoming hunters are a bunch of idiots that cant tell the difference between transfering a license to a disabled vet VS the transferable to anyone licenses that UT, NV, CO, and NM have...that are transferred for profit.

Arizona has a program where a parent can transfer a license to their kids, again, no money changes hands. Arizona also is very much against landowner tags as well as outfitter sponsored tags. Because of their pro-active stance on opposing those types of licenses, they likley will never have them. Further, that program has been in place for a number of years and the chances of outfitters and landowners getting transferable tags in AZ is no greater now than before they allowed parents to transfer licenses to youth hunters.

What leads you to believe that WY sportsmen are not smart enough to do exactly as Arizona has done? I contend that WY sportsmen are as pro-active as those in AZ...maybe even more-so.

You stated a number of times that WYSFW was in fact supporting outfitter sponsored licenses...and thats all I really need to know. I dont give a $hit what other "details" were in the proposal that WYSFW was "going to do"...couldnt care less. The simple fact you and SFW supported that crap is a deal breaker for me.

You cant buy the sportsmen in Wyoming like you and SFW bought in Utah...integrity and doing the right thing are not for sale here.

If you think the people in Wyoming want anything close to the cluster-#$%k that Utah has...you better think again.
 
TOPGUN & BuzzH,

You both seem to be very angry. It is obvious that no matter what I do you will find fault with it. I am fine with that. We all will not agree all the time. You can throw all the rocks you want at me, I will continue to represent the interest of WY SFW. Perhaps some day there will be an issue we agree upon. Granted I will not be holding my breath for that to occur.

Neither one of you deny that Wyoming now has a transferable license nor can either of you predict what will be the outcome of that precedence. Neither can I. Only time will tell.

Never did I imply that Wyoming's sportsmen were a bunch of idiots. I only asked why I would need to poll them to understand that they are against transferable licenses. I happen to think that Wyoming's sportsmen love our great state and the hunting, fishing and trapping opportunities afforded us and believe it is something worth protecting.

Wyoming's issues are so much different than Utah's the comparison is laughable. WY SFW has its own Board of Directors which all live here. Utah doesn't even enter the discussions. You both appear paranoid to me. I keep asking where we have caused any one or damaged any part of Wyoming's hunting, fishing or trapping heritage? All you can say is that you didn't like one proposed action we took; that of stabilizing the outfitting industry. The devil is always in the details. Maybe next before you condemn our actions you should try to understand them.

Got to love this great Nation we have that allows us all to form our own opinion and disagree from time to time!
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-15-11 AT 04:55PM (MST)[p]Not angry at all! Just very perplexed that you keep yapping and saying the same thing over and over---NOTHING! "I happen to think that Wyoming's sportsmen love our great state and the hunting, fishing and trapping opportunities afforded us and believe it is something worth protecting." I don't believe Buzz or I have said anything different have we? You have stated absolutely nothing that your organization stands for or has done on a positive note!!! You should know in your job that the best defense is a good offense! You just keep coming on here stating your organization has done nothing to harm Wyoming and for us to show you where it has. I'm not going to argue one way or the other on that statement because at the present time you won't even say what your organization's stance is concerning the Outfitters set aside tags that was purposed some time ago. I wasn't around this site to see you state that WYSFW backed the Outfitters on the proposal, but others have posted that information on previous threads and you have not denied it when BUZZH also made that statement as recently as today on this thread. I'm obviously not the only one who feels your dealings with the public leaves a lot to be desired. Just read Hawkeye's post yesterday in this thread. As long as you continue to represent the organization in a negative way, which is the way I feel you are doing on this site alone, you will not gain many members, but probably will even lose some when they start questioning what representation they are really getting for their money!
 
BUZZ-I work with a fellow who married the daugher of a prominent landowner in SW Wy.He hunts 102 deer and 30 elk every year.He has also used the tags to hunt 100 elk as well.He could hunt 101 deer,too,if he wanted to.That seems pretty transferable to me.Just sayin'....
 
I should explain myself further..It seems to be a matter of semantics..A way around the law..I could probably figure out a way to get one as well,if I wanted to bad enough.I hate the LO tags.What they were originally meant for,and what they have become,are two totally different things nowdays.Plus,they pull from the tag pool.They are not in addition to the tag pool.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-15-11 AT 09:20PM (MST)[p]nontypical---Are you trying to say that the guy is using other family member tags illegally to hunt where he is or buying the tags by representing himself as the landowner? If that's the case, it's not a matter of the tags being transferrable, but rather that he's a violating poacher!
 
nontypical,

I'm in agreement with you on the LO tags, but they still arent a transferable license.

They are a joke and they do put a pretty good dent in the tag pool in some areas. I also agree that they are being abused in many cases.

If I had my way, I wouldnt issue a single LO tag in any state. If I had to allow them, I'd make them good only on private land owned by the tagholder. Further, the LO tags would largely be for antlerless animals only, and I'd only give them if LO's agreed to allow public hunting on their deeded land.
 
BuzzH---I'm pretty much in your corner on the landowner tag deal, although I don't know that I would be as restrictive on the sex the tag would be good for like you mentioned.
 
TG-Nothing illegal about it.Just a loophole,if you will,in the law.Daddy-in-law doesn't hunt,and other "family" members don't care that much about it.At least this year he is giving up the tags to younger family members to use to get them into hunting.
 
Okay, so what you're saying is this wealthy landowner has enough property in those areas you mentioned to get landowner tags and the guy that's married to his daughter can legally get one of those licenses. Is that correct? Can the guy get more than one type 1 tag for elk, for example, or is he still under the restriction we are all under? I think I now understand why you and Buzz are saying what you are about these licenses being abused, if I'm reading you right!
 
So if this guys owns a ton of land, can a bunch of close relatives get tags under his land ownership status? Also, those tags are only good for his land in Wyoming compared to the way NM lets them be used for public lands aren't they?
 
Numerous tags are not possible per family.Part of this ownership is a grazing assoc.If you own enough of the land within an area(I think it's a section-Buzz would probably know),and can prove enough user days per species on your land,you qualify for a landowner tag for that species.When you factor in all those ranching families,it's possible that could translate into a fair amount of tags taken from the pool.In LQ areas with low tags,that is a large factor affecting draw odds.Luckily,many of those guys don't care to hunt,so a lot of those don't get used.However,if you were to marry the daughter...You would become eligible for a tag.You might have to fight your bro-in-law for it,though.
 

Similar threads

LIK2HNT
Resident helping NR hunt wilderness
Replies
51
Views
2k
BuzzH
BuzzH
Southpawshooter
Drawing Odds
Replies
4
Views
586
LIK2HNT
LIK2HNT
wstrntines
And you think Utah non residents are the issue
Replies
99
Views
4k
Longun
Longun

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

90C75B2B-3ADA-4A17-83CD-4007DDEF4CA2.jpeg
C202439C-6521-471A-BFE9-83D69D554C5F.jpeg
D81CE768-215A-4A13-8EE6-007608D50CCA.jpeg
IMG_2261.JPG
3CE4B474-46EC-4FB4-A86C-B8FE79FE660B.jpeg
Big Buck
HUNT3692 - Copy2.JPG
C1DCCBC9-D488-417F-BFD5-3043D4F4CA75.jpeg
FD13D9F3-8B4B-45B3-8F29-196111504457.jpeg
Ole Honey Hole 2.JPG
Screenshot_20220704-181222_Gallery.jpg
IMG_5111 copy.jpg

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom