WY Game & Fish proposed regs Chapter 2 Sec 20

T

Teepee

Active Member
Messages
264
from G&F website, proposed regs: They are asking for comments.

(d) below has been discussed previously on here & likely will get Founders attention.

Section 20. Use of Specialized Hunting Technologies and Equipment.
(a) No person shall use any device attached to a legal firearm, muzzleloader or archery equipment, capable of producing a thermal or infrared image, or other imaging outside the normal visible light spectrum, with the intent to spot, locate and aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(b) No person shall use any real-time video photography equipment, real-time thermal or infrared imaging device, or other real-time imaging device outside the normal visible light spectrum, capable of automatically transmitting an image, picture or video for remote viewing, with the intent to spot, locate and aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(c) A trail camera, or similar device, that can only store an image, picture or video inside the device, and which does not have the capability to automatically transmit images in real-time, is permissible for use in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(d) No person shall see (appears to be a typo, should state sell) or barter any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison geographic location information to aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

Link: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/April_CH-2_Draft-1-29-20-4.pdf
 
(d) is a version of Founder's Law but since the authority was granted by the Legislature to the G&F Commission, it doesn't have to go through the legislative process.
 
That law doesn’t effect me and my consulting. I made changes to my consulting packages before they even passed the bill last year.
I provide NO geographical location information at all on game that I’ve seen.
What I offer is trailhead locations, trail path information, water locations, suggested camping location, and suggested glassing locations with my opinion on how to hunt an area, how to move about for effective coverage of the most ground possible during prime hours. I also provide information to help with safety and coaching and motivation.
Of course I only send people into great areas where big stuff lives, but I do not provide geographical location information on any game animals I’ve seen.
I also offer packages for general season elk hunting. And I do offer consulting in other states as well, but with different package details.

My Hunt Consulting Details for Wyoming Deer.
 
jm77 said:
If Founder would have just got an outfitters license to start with, none of this would have happened.
Click to expand...
Founder doesn’t need an outfitters permit for what he does, so why get one?
If I needed one, I would have maybe tried to get one, but don’t need one, so why get one? Just to hang on my wall or what? I don’t need a liquor license either, so I won’t get one.

Anyway, the legislature clearly doesn’t want wildlife geographical locations sold, so I don’t sell any locations of wildlife at all. I’m abiding by the law as I should.

For four years all the complaints have been about selling GPS coordinates, so I discontinued including that information in my consulting reports. Then they passed a law that one can’t sell game animal geographical location information, and I don’t.
I’m abiding by the law. What more can I do? I want to provide consulting and I do so legally.
 
Founder said:
Founder doesn’t need an outfitters permit for what he does, so why get one?
If I needed one, I would have maybe tried to get one, but don’t need one, so why get one? Just to hang on my wall or what? I don’t need a liquor license either, so I won’t get one.

Anyway, the legislature clearly doesn’t want wildlife geographical locations sold, so I don’t sell any locations of wildlife at all. I’m abiding by the law as I should.

For four years all the complaints have been about selling GPS coordinates, so I discontinued including that information in my consulting reports. Then they passed a law that one can’t sell game animal geographical location information, and I don’t.
I’m abiding by the law. What more can I do? I want to provide consulting and I do so legally.
Click to expand...
None of this makes my quote any the less true.
 
First off, I think scouting services are valuable and there is a place for them. I think what Founder is doing is way less impactful on the herd and mature bucks than what outfitters do as part of their business. I would say the deer is earned more using Founder's package deal then paying for an outfitter so it should be allowable somehow.

If I were Founder, I would be pretty concerned with the definition of "Geographic Location" though. Founder may not be selling exact points, but it seems from his webpage he is selling areas where specific bucks have been seen: "Photos of ALL the Better Bucks in an Area".

So how big is this area and could this "area" be considered a "Geographic Location"? I think it could, but I do see that it could be debated as location generally refers to a specific point, but what if the area is less than a square mile?

One definition:
Geographic location refers to a position on the Earth. Your absolute geographic location is defined by two coordinates, longitude and latitude. These two coordinates can be used to give specific locations independent of an outside reference point.

Another:
In geography, location and place are used to identify a point or an area on the Earth's surface or elsewhere. The term location generally implies a higher degree...
 
nripepi said:
First off, I think scouting services are valuable and there is a place for them. I think what Founder is doing is way less impactful on the herd and mature bucks than what outfitters do as part of their business. I would say the deer is earned more using Founder's package deal then paying for an outfitter so it should be allowable somehow.

If I were Founder, I would be pretty concerned with the definition of "Geographic Location" though. Founder may not be selling exact points, but it seems from his webpage he is selling areas where specific bucks have been seen: "Photos of ALL the Better Bucks in an Area".

So how big is this area and could this "area" be considered a "Geographic Location"? I think it could, but I do see that it could be debated as location generally refers to a specific point, but what if the area is less than a square mile?

One definition:
Geographic location refers to a position on the Earth. Your absolute geographic location is defined by two coordinates, longitude and latitude. These two coordinates can be used to give specific locations independent of an outside reference point.

Another:
In geography, location and place are used to identify a point or an area on the Earth's surface or elsewhere. The term location generally implies a higher degree...
Click to expand...

Right, they're going to have to clean up the definitions or it won't hold in court.
 
nripepi said:
First off, I think scouting services are valuable and there is a place for them. I think what Founder is doing is way less impactful on the herd and mature bucks than what outfitters do as part of their business. I would say the deer is earned more using Founder's package deal then paying for an outfitter so it should be allowable somehow.

If I were Founder, I would be pretty concerned with the definition of "Geographic Location" though. Founder may not be selling exact points, but it seems from his webpage he is selling areas where specific bucks have been seen: "Photos of ALL the Better Bucks in an Area".

So how big is this area and could this "area" be considered a "Geographic Location"? I think it could, but I do see that it could be debated as location generally refers to a specific point, but what if the area is less than a square mile?

One definition:
Geographic location refers to a position on the Earth. Your absolute geographic location is defined by two coordinates, longitude and latitude. These two coordinates can be used to give specific locations independent of an outside reference point.

Another:
In geography, location and place are used to identify a point or an area on the Earth's surface or elsewhere. The term location generally implies a higher degree...
Click to expand...
I've analyzed what you're talking about, and one could argue that the rule (law) and the definitions of geographic location are vague. If that's the case, then the Vagueness doctrine comes into play. The state should define geographical location. If a geographic location isn't two coordinates to identify a point on earth, as I believe most people would assume that it is, especially after 4 years of using "GPS coordinates" in all arguments and debates to create this law, then it should be defined so we know. In my opinion, they are outlawing the sell of a geographical location that is defined by two coordinates. Not just any expanse of land that is left undefined.

Next up, the law clearly outlaws sharing location of an "animal". And that I clearly do not do. Again, if the law is meant to outlaw anything and everything that might put someone in some undefined "area" where a deer I saw was, then it should be more clear to that.

Next up, if my selling coordinates of places to sit and look for deer as part of my package is illegal, then a guide taking someone to those exact locations as part of their package, would also be illegal. The law passed does not exempt guides and outfitters. We both offer packages to aid hunters, and sharing with them these locations is part of the packages. In my view, it doesn't matter if I put a star on a map or a guide shows them in person the place.

I believe if the definition of geographic location isn't a point defined by two coordinates, they would have instead used the words "geographical area" and then defined the size of an "area".
Just google "geographic location definition".

I firmly believe that I'm abiding by the law as it is written. If what they wrote really isn't what they meant, then they should've done better work. All I can do is follow the law as I understand it using the definitions of all the words in the law.
 
HAHA. The one thing I do not like about WY is how threatened they are by people pre-scouting and selling their information. Sorry but what Founder is selling is simply knowledge. It is his intellectual property that he has accumulated over the last several years. The beauty of WY is for the most part they support individual freedom. But in this case they are more socialist and freedom limiting than even California would be...

Like it or not, anyone should be able to sell their knowledge on anything not protected by specific copyright laws.

So ultimately none of this would be happening if the people of WY just manned up and out hunted and out scouted Founder.

That will ikely ruffle some feathers, but the whole thing is silly. From a pure liberty stand point if we support freedom then this is a bad law.
 
Teepee said:
from G&F website, proposed regs: They are asking for comments.

(d) below has been discussed previously on here & likely will get Founders attention.

Section 20. Use of Specialized Hunting Technologies and Equipment.
(a) No person shall use any device attached to a legal firearm, muzzleloader or archery equipment, capable of producing a thermal or infrared image, or other imaging outside the normal visible light spectrum, with the intent to spot, locate and aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(b) No person shall use any real-time video photography equipment, real-time thermal or infrared imaging device, or other real-time imaging device outside the normal visible light spectrum, capable of automatically transmitting an image, picture or video for remote viewing, with the intent to spot, locate and aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(c) A trail camera, or similar device, that can only store an image, picture or video inside the device, and which does not have the capability to automatically transmit images in real-time, is permissible for use in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

(d) No person shall see (appears to be a typo, should state sell) or barter any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison geographic location information to aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison.

Link: https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/April_CH-2_Draft-1-29-20-4.pdf
Click to expand...
Do you have a link to the comment section?
 
I sent my comments:

------------------------------------------
Comments in regard to:
** "No person shall see or barter any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison geographic location information to aid in the taking of any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison." **

What exactly is the definition of "geographic location"? Is it defined by two coordinates, longitude and latitude, as most definitions found online describe it? Definitions are important in laws and it should be made crystal clear in regulations.

I'm the person who this rule was aimed at stopping, and because I plan to continue my consulting, I'd like to have the definition of "geographic location". I've found your definitions for all other words and word combinations, but that one.

I'm extremely confident that I'll be able to abide by your rules and laws and continue selling my consulting packages, however I would very much appreciate everything being crystal clear. Your officers need to also be crystal clear on the rule so that I'm not harassed by an officer who is also unclear of the definition.

I would also hope that effort is made to enforce this law within the outfitting and guide community whom often share locations of pre-scouted game to drop camp clients.

Thanks for your time and I hope you toss this rule out because the legislature did not provide a definition of "geographic location" AND if "geographic location" means anything other than two coordinates, longitude and latitude, and their intersecting point, that this rule will impact guides and outfitters and their businesses and the hunt packages they sell as well as mine.

The biggest reason this rule needs to be tossed is because it's silly and designed only to try and force more sportsmen to hire outfitters, as the activity this law is aimed at stopping has virtually zero effect on game herds. It's only outfitter welfare.
--------------------------------------------
 
I hear ya and hope you win out here, but just to play devil's advocate here.

You are selling geographic locations (lat/longs) for the "Best Spots for Glassing for Biggest Buck Success" and you are also selling "Photos of ALL the Better Bucks in an Area".

Wouldn't one assume that when you are in the geographic location of the "Best Spot" that you are near where you saw the "Better Bucks" and where one would have the best opportunity to glass one of those biggest bucks?

I think you can fight it, but I think you might lose. I think that could be considered illegal based on "the any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison geographic location information." That might not be the "geographic location" lat/long where you saw the buck(s), but that is "information" about the "geographic location" where you saw that animal and sold photos of that animal.

I would read the first paragraph of Page 90 of this book about geographic information location where it references a Department of the Environment report from 1987). It states that
Geographic Location Information is information which can be related to a location (point, area or volume on the earth)

You definitely have a point on outfitters though, if you can't do it, then they shouldn't be allowed to either based on the current law!!!

Founder said:
Next up, the law clearly outlaws sharing location of an "animal". And that I clearly do not do. Again, if the law is meant to outlaw anything and everything that might put someone in some undefined "area" where a deer I saw was, then it should be more clear to that.

Next up, if my selling coordinates of places to sit and look for deer as part of my package is illegal, then a guide taking someone to those exact locations as part of their package, would also be illegal. The law passed does not exempt guides and outfitters. We both offer packages to aid hunters, and sharing with them these locations is part of the packages. In my view, it doesn't matter if I put a star on a map or a guide shows them in person the place.
Click to expand...
 
elks96 said:
Like it or not, anyone should be able to sell their knowledge on anything not protected by specific copyright laws.
Click to expand...

How about this scenario: while hunting whitetails during the rut, I spot a 350 bull bedded in the middle of the day, and get on Facebook and sell that bull's location to anyone with a tag for $1000 or the highest bid.

How warm and fuzzy does that make you feel? Is that the kind of hunting you grew up with or is it the "get them anyway you can as long as they're dead" method?
 
nripepi said:
I hear ya and hope you win out here, but just to play devil's advocate here.

You are selling geographic locations (lat/longs) for the "Best Spots for Glassing for Biggest Buck Success" and you are also selling "Photos of ALL the Better Bucks in an Area".

Wouldn't one assume that when you are in the geographic location of the "Best Spot" that you are near where you saw the "Better Bucks" and where one would have the best opportunity to glass one of those biggest bucks?

I think you can fight it, but I think you might lose. I think that could be considered illegal based on "the any big game animal, trophy game animal or wild bison geographic location information." That might not be the "geographic location" lat/long where you saw the buck(s), but that is "information" about the "geographic location" where you saw that animal and sold photos of that animal.

I would read the first paragraph of Page 90 of this book about geographic information location where it references a Department of the Environment report from 1987). It states that
Geographic Location Information is information which can be related to a location (point, area or volume on the earth)

You definitely have a point on outfitters though, if you can't do it, then they shouldn't be allowed to either based on the current law!!!
Click to expand...
I'll push back cause it's a fun topic. I don't think enforceable laws can be written that say "trophy game animal geographic location" and then argue to a judge that geographic locations of rocks and hills and dirt is the same thing, because those rocks and dirt could do this or that. Laws can't work like that, or every law on the books could be enforced like that. Prosecutors could argue things like, "The speed limit says 55, but 45 is also a speed limit and so we'll go with that today". No, no, they've got to explain the law so that everyone knows and understands what we're expected to do.
Just the fact that we can't come to a consensus in this thread shows that the law is vague. How can anyone know what the law really is if we don't know what "geographical location" means?

With laws, they can't just pick out the words they want to use to prosecute someone. Everything has to fit together. Even simple words like "or" and "and" have meaning.

If the law was meant to outlaw me from selling glassing spots, then it could have easily been added to include that, even though that's not something they can do on federal land.

If the law meant a geographic area and not geographic location, then they would have used "area" and then defined what an area is, just as they do to define regions and then region boundary descriptions to explain the border of the area of the region. If the geographic location is just left as an undefined expanse of land determined by an officer, then any magazine that says "hunt Wyoming" could be prosecuted for selling the location of game animals" if an officer just decides that geographic location is all of Wyoming today.

Again, I think "geographic location" is a GPS coordinate, not a larger area that has yet to be determined. Outfitters would have been smart enough to question that, right??? That could outlaw the very thing they do in Wyoming, take people to places to sit and spot for game as part of their hunt package. Plus for 4 years they threw around GPS coordinates while trying to get the law passed. I think that's solid evidence to what the legislature wanted.

BTW - I don't sell photos or video, I always share them for free to all of you here on the site. What I sell is what trailhead to go up and where to sit for a chance of seeing one of the animals I saw on the scouting trip. There isn't even a guarantee that the animal is still there or even alive, so I sell my opinion on that as well.

I know I'm long winded, but I enjoy the conversation.
 
jm77 said:
How about this scenario: while hunting whitetails during the rut, I spot a 350 bull bedded in the middle of the day, and get on Facebook and sell that bull's location to anyone with a tag for $1000 or the highest bid.

How warm and fuzzy does that make you feel? Is that the kind of hunting you grew up with or is it the "get them anyway you can as long as they're dead" method?
Click to expand...

Not about feelings. That is the issue here, take feelings out of the equation. If you have personal knowledge that can benefit another person, why would you not benefit from it as well. In your example, if a person is willing to pay your $1000 for a bull you saw then why not? They would still need to, hunt the bull, they would need to go to that location, work the wind and do everything else.

From a management or biological perspective, how is the end result from selling that location for $1000 any different then that night sitting in camp and telling a guy with an elk tag where you saw the bull? It has the same result a person goes out to try and find a bull you saw.

So what is the difference? It seems silly and overly emotional. Are we going to go about banning and regulating everything that we "feel" is wrong despite it not having any net negative impact on the resource?

Again it is pretty simple, I have a certain piece of knowledge that other might find valuable, why can't I sell that knowledge? Why make more laws that are not necessary and ultimately completely unenforceable?

I knew there would be disagreement with my perspective, and that is fine. But ultimately I am not about to support such regulations. Not when we can have outfitters flying, or when outfitters can have 2-3 dozen guys out scouting, etc.

As for my way of hunting, you have no idea of how I hunt, but good attempt at a personal attack.
 
jm77 said:
How about this scenario: while hunting whitetails during the rut, I spot a 350 bull bedded in the middle of the day, and get on Facebook and sell that bull's location to anyone with a tag for $1000 or the highest bid.

How warm and fuzzy does that make you feel? Is that the kind of hunting you grew up with or is it the "get them anyway you can as long as they're dead" method?
Click to expand...
I personally wouldn't do that, as I have my way of helping people in a manner that I think is appropriate, ethical and respectful to the game. But you feel my way is also inappropriate and that's your opinion, which is fine with me.
Your argument above is the same type of tactic that anti-hunters use. They dig up some of the worst scenario's (often not real) they can think of and use that to paint the whole picture of hunting as bad, and only enjoyed by the sick and deranged, when in reality it is not. But that's how they sell their argument.
I take great pride in being able to help guys out on hunts who can't scout themselves and can't afford an outfitter. They shouldn't be left to show up the day before the hunt after waiting 7+ years for a tag and have no idea where to hunt in a place that can be dangerous. Wyoming has no problem taking their money for points and a tag, but then do take issue if those guys want to just buy information instead of spending $7,000 on a guide. It's ridiculous.
 
jm77 said:
How about this scenario: while hunting whitetails during the rut, I spot a 350 bull bedded in the middle of the day, and get on Facebook and sell that bull's location to anyone with a tag for $1000 or the highest bid.

How warm and fuzzy does that make you feel? Is that the kind of hunting you grew up with or is it the "get them anyway you can as long as they're dead" method?
Click to expand...

The difference to me is that founder isn’t selling locations “live” so to speak. Meaning he isn’t spotting animals and calling a hunter in to shoot it the same day. But hey I guess it’s fine as long as you have an outfitters license....
 
Founder said:
I'll push back cause it's a fun topic. I don't think enforceable laws can be written that say "trophy game animal geographic location" and then argue to a judge that geographic locations of rocks and hills and dirt is the same thing, because those rocks and dirt could do this or that. Laws can't work like that, or every law on the books could be enforced like that. Prosecutors could argue things like, "The speed limit says 55, but 45 is also a speed limit and so we'll go with that today". No, no, they've got to explain the law so that everyone knows and understands what we're expected to do.
Just the fact that we can't come to a consensus in this thread shows that the law is vague. How can anyone know what the law really is if we don't know what "geographical location" means?

With laws, they can't just pick out the words they want to use to prosecute someone. Everything has to fit together. Even simple words like "or" and "and" have meaning.

If the law was meant to outlaw me from selling glassing spots, then it could have easily been added to include that, even though that's not something they can do on federal land.

If the law meant a geographic area and not geographic location, then they would have used "area" and then defined what an area is, just as they do to define regions and then region boundary descriptions to explain the border of the area of the region. If the geographic location is just left as an undefined expanse of land determined by an officer, then any magazine that says "hunt Wyoming" could be prosecuted for selling the location of game animals" if an officer just decides that geographic location is all of Wyoming today.

Again, I think "geographic location" is a GPS coordinate, not a larger area that has yet to be determined. Outfitters would have been smart enough to question that, right??? That could outlaw the very thing they do in Wyoming, take people to places to sit and spot for game as part of their hunt package. Plus for 4 years they threw around GPS coordinates while trying to get the law passed. I think that's solid evidence to what the legislature wanted.

BTW - I don't sell photos or video, I always share them for free to all of you here on the site. What I sell is what trailhead to go up and where to sit for a chance of seeing one of the animals I saw on the scouting trip. There isn't even a guarantee that the animal is still there or even alive, so I sell my opinion on that as well.

I know I'm long winded, but I enjoy the conversation.
Click to expand...


I just got virtually the same speech from my 7 year old cause I didn't tell her to clean specifically behind her bed when I said clean your room. You're grasping at straws man....
 
elks96 said:
Not about feelings. That is the issue here, take feelings out of the equation. If you have personal knowledge that can benefit another person, why would you not benefit from it as well. In your example, if a person is willing to pay your $1000 for a bull you saw then why not? They would still need to, hunt the bull, they would need to go to that location, work the wind and do everything else.

From a management or biological perspective, how is the end result from selling that location for $1000 any different then that night sitting in camp and telling a guy with an elk tag where you saw the bull? It has the same result a person goes out to try and find a bull you saw.

So what is the difference? It seems silly and overly emotional. Are we going to go about banning and regulating everything that we "feel" is wrong despite it not having any net negative impact on the resource?

Again it is pretty simple, I have a certain piece of knowledge that other might find valuable, why can't I sell that knowledge? Why make more laws that are not necessary and ultimately completely unenforceable?

I knew there would be disagreement with my perspective, and that is fine. But ultimately I am not about to support such regulations. Not when we can have outfitters flying, or when outfitters can have 2-3 dozen guys out scouting, etc.

As for my way of hunting, you have no idea of how I hunt, but good attempt at a personal attack.
Click to expand...

You answered my question as to what you as a hunter will accept.

And as far as banning things we "feel" are wrong, why don't you read the G&F regulations for Wyoming. Plenty of those in there and any other states, too. I know you haven't completely read Wyoming's yet or you would know it's illegal to spot and locate with an aircraft; for anyone.

Also, next time drop the red herrings, we can disagree as to what type of hunters we are, but stick to the subject, i.e. your little speech about feelings.
 
Since i have helped several members on this site by giving them info on several hunt areas i think i need to back charge some people here.

In other news i know of a 420 inch bull. Im selling info to the drainage where he likes to stay. Starting bid is $30000.


. Joking aside everything jim77 has said is spot on
 
Last edited:
Founder said:
I take great pride in being able to help guys out on hunts who can't scout themselves and can't afford an outfitter. They shouldn't be left to show up the day before the hunt after waiting 7+ years for a tag and have no idea where to hunt in a place that can be dangerous.
Click to expand...

Some people do that very thing and don't take compensation for it. I've had people help me out and I've done the same for lots of others.

Sad that some feel the need to be compensated financially for everything they do to help a fellow hunter.

As for the law, I hope they tighten it enough that the scouting services are done away with.
 
I look at it like this. A brand new hunter like my wife can pay for a guide and be successful. There is zero chance she would be successful if she bought every scouting package founder sold. So why is what founder is doing so vile? A guided hunt is easier to be successful then a scouting package.

Ok it’s not a slam dunk yet it’s vile and needs outlawed. I could get on board if they were making guiding illegal also. Until then the issue is that people don’t like the fact founder creates more competition.

When did they ban that? Last I read it was legal until like the beginning of August.
jm77 said:
I know you haven't completely read Wyoming's yet or you would know it's illegal to spot and locate with an aircraft; for anyone.
Click to expand...
 
BuzzH said:
Some people do that very thing and don't take compensation for it. I've had people help me out and I've done the same for lots of others.

Sad that some feel the need to be compensated financially for everything they do to help a fellow hunter.

As for the law, I hope they tighten it enough that the scouting services are done away with.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you found your answer, just do your free scouting service and all my clientele would dry up. You could offer a free guide service and drive them out of business too.
 
DirtyTough said:
When did they ban that? Last I read it was legal until like the beginning of August.
Click to expand...

Jeff and I worked on that and successfully made that change several years ago. Jeff wrote the current regulation that was adopted by the Department. It was a smart regulation change that went through the public process. I also would be remiss if I didn't mention the help we got from Nesvik on it as well. Wasn't perfect, but it changed the definition of aircraft, made scouting from the air illegal from August 1-January 31 and also allows for aircraft to be used for transportation.

Win-win-win and opened up a legal option for people to hunt landlocked State ground via aircraft for the first time.
 
DirtyTough said:
I look at it like this. A brand new hunter like my wife can pay for a guide and be successful. There is zero chance she would be successful if she bought every scouting package founder sold. So why is what founder is doing so vile? A guided hunt is easier to be successful then a scouting package.

Ok it’s not a slam dunk yet it’s vile and needs outlawed. I could get on board if they were making guiding illegal also. Until then the issue is that people don’t like the fact founder creates more competition.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone believes what Founder is doing is vile, that's a pretty strong word.

I just don't think, when considering the amount of pressure we already put on deer with every other thing...trail cams, long range rifles, long range archery equipment, outfitting, etc. etc. that we need scouting services as well.

Its not up to Founder to decide, and even though I appreciate his comments, Wyoming residents are entitled to draft regulations and laws as they see fit to allow, or not allow scouting services.

Its no different than the Wyoming Residents having enough of Rob Wiley and others flying around all over the Wyoming Range and scouting from the air in August, September, and October. We didn't like what was going on, so passed a regulation to make it illegal.

Same reason we have hunting seasons, quotas, bag limits, caliber restrictions, minimum bow draw weights. Why we cant hunt big game with a spot light, why we cant run deer with dogs. Why we cant trap deer in legholds or snare them. Why we don't allow people to hunt cow elk in June. Why we don't allow people to shoot mule deer bucks in January in ass-deep snow.

This is no different...Wyoming's wildlife, Wyoming's choice in how we manage and regulate it.

I don't believe we need people selling scouting packages, that's all the justification I need to want to regulate it.
 
BuzzH said:
Jeff and I worked on that and successfully made that change several years ago. Jeff wrote the current regulation that was adopted by the Department. It was a smart regulation change that went through the public process. I also would be remiss if I didn't mention the help we got from Nesvik on it as well. Wasn't perfect, but it changed the definition of aircraft, made scouting from the air illegal from August 1-January 31 and also allows for aircraft to be used for transportation.

Win-win-win and opened up a legal option for people to hunt landlocked State ground via aircraft for the first time.
Click to expand...

So it’s not illegal. I thought that was the deal. But the way JM typed his post made it sound like it was illegal to scout from aircraft.

BuzzH said:
I don't think anyone believes what Founder is doing is vile, that's a pretty strong word.

I just don't think, when considering the amount of pressure we already put on deer with every other thing...trail cams, long range rifles, long range archery equipment, outfitting, etc. etc. that we need scouting services as well.

Its not up to Founder to decide, and even though I appreciate his comments, Wyoming residents are entitled to draft regulations and laws as they see fit to allow, or not allow scouting services.

Its no different than the Wyoming Residents having enough of Rob Wiley and others flying around all over the Wyoming Range and scouting from the air in August, September, and October. We didn't like what was going on, so passed a regulation to make it illegal.

Same reason we have hunting seasons, quotas, bag limits, caliber restrictions, minimum bow draw weights. Why we cant hunt big game with a spot light, why we cant run deer with dogs. Why we cant trap deer in legholds or snare them. Why we don't allow people to hunt cow elk in June. Why we don't allow people to shoot mule deer bucks in January in ass-deep snow.

This is no different...Wyoming's wildlife, Wyoming's choice in how we manage and regulate it.

I don't believe we need people selling scouting packages, that's all the justification I need to want to regulate it.
Click to expand...
It’s just so hard for me to understand how there is zero issue with shooting a cat out of a tree that you paid someone to tree with dogs. That takes zero hunting on the ‘hunters’ part. But there is an issue with paying to be pointed in the right direction.

Or paying someone to put out bait and shoot a bear that has been eating dog food for a week. Again it takes zero hunting as a ‘hunter’ But there is an issue with paying to be pointed in the right direction.

For me personally it’s mind boggling. I can pay to whack a cat in a tree. I can pay to a bear over bait. I can even pay a ton of money for a couple guys to shadow a buck or bull 24/7. But I can’t pay for info that might be a month old. Straight mind boggling.

Of all the things out there to worry about. What’s next? Making sure your rangefinder can’t range past 500 yards unless you use an outfitter? The BC of your bullet can’t exceed a G1 of .350? Your bow isn’t allowed to shoot faster then 200’ a second unless you are with a resident?

And when something like this gets passed that affects 5-10 people a year everyone will get to read about how it’s so great. Yet outfitters are running 40-50 clients through a year each. Just mind boggling.

I would love to see this type of effort used towards limiting technology that the masses use instead of something that is this small.

Make it 1X scopes only on the early high hunts. Then hunters can still use modern rifles but will definitely be limited in range. That would do more for the deer then a law that affects 0.001% of hunters in an area.

Just on principle I hope there is a way around it for anyone that wants to provide scouting packages. I can’t stand the hypocrisy.
 
DirtyTough said:
So it’s not illegal. I thought that was the deal. But the way JM typed his post made it sound like it was illegal to scout from aircraft.
Click to expand...


It is illegal to scout using aircraft from August 1 through Jan 31 of the following year. Are you reading the posts?
 
BuzzH said:
I don't think anyone believes what Founder is doing is vile, that's a pretty strong word.

I just don't think, when considering the amount of pressure we already put on deer with every other thing...trail cams, long range rifles, long range archery equipment, outfitting, etc. etc. that we need scouting services as well.

Its not up to Founder to decide, and even though I appreciate his comments, Wyoming residents are entitled to draft regulations and laws as they see fit to allow, or not allow scouting services.

Its no different than the Wyoming Residents having enough of Rob Wiley and others flying around all over the Wyoming Range and scouting from the air in August, September, and October. We didn't like what was going on, so passed a regulation to make it illegal.

Same reason we have hunting seasons, quotas, bag limits, caliber restrictions, minimum bow draw weights. Why we cant hunt big game with a spot light, why we cant run deer with dogs. Why we cant trap deer in legholds or snare them. Why we don't allow people to hunt cow elk in June. Why we don't allow people to shoot mule deer bucks in January in ass-deep snow.

This is no different...Wyoming's wildlife, Wyoming's choice in how we manage and regulate it.

I don't believe we need people selling scouting packages, that's all the justification I need to want to regulate it.
Click to expand...
So you’re pretty confident this new law does the job, huh?
Do you have any clue what exactly “geographic location” means? Is it just any expanse of land that is just defined on the fly?
Is the law just setup for me, or will it be enforced in the outfitting community as well?
 
Founder said:
So you’re pretty confident this new law does the job, huh?
Do you have any clue what exactly “geographic location” means? Is it just any expanse of land that is just defined on the fly?
Is the law just setup for me, or will it be enforced in the outfitting community as well?
Click to expand...

I think the regulation needs to be tightened up and I'm sure the commission and department will work on it.

If you read the regulation it doesn't exempt anyone.
 
BuzzH said:
I think the regulation needs to be tightened up and I'm sure the commission and department will work on it.

If you read the regulation it doesn't exempt anyone.
Click to expand...

Can the definition of 'geographic location' be defined by the GF commission or does it have to come from the state legislature? I'm assuming 'geographic location' will be added to the definition section of the regs.
 
BuzzH said:
I think the regulation needs to be tightened up and I'm sure the commission and department will work on it.

If you read the regulation it doesn't exempt anyone.
Click to expand...
I just ask because some debate has been on "geographic location" and what that exactly means. What I've concluded is that it means a particular point defined by latitude and longitude intersecting points.......a GPS coordinate.
Others have suggested that it might mean any expanse of land, undetermined and therefore could be as small as a square foot or as large as the entire state. But I doubt it would just be left up to any officer to decide. And, it would effect outfitters as well, as a large part of the hunting package they offer is taking people to glassing locations to look for pre-scouted bucks. My package just tells people where those locations are and they go themselves. Pretty much the same thing though when included it what we each provide.

All the other words and word combinations are well defined, it's just that word combination that would be nice to have a definition of from the legislature.

I personally think the legislature would need to define "geographic location". That could change the rule immensely and so I doubt they leave it up to the commission to decide. But I don't know.
 
Founder said:
I just ask because some debate has been on "geographic location" and what that exactly means. What I've concluded is that it means a particular point defined by latitude and longitude intersecting points.......a GPS coordinate.
Others have suggested that it might mean any expanse of land, undetermined and therefore could be as small as a square foot or as large as the entire state. But I doubt it would just be left up to any officer to decide. And, it would effect outfitters as well, as a large part of the hunting package they offer is taking people to glassing locations to look for pre-scouted bucks. My package just tells people where those locations are and they go themselves. Pretty much the same thing though when included it what we each provide.

All the other words and word combinations are well defined, it's just that word combination that would be nice to have a definition of from the legislature.

I personally think the legislature would need to define "geographic location". That could change the rule immensely and so I doubt they leave it up to the commission to decide. But I don't know.
Click to expand...
I think they should define "geographic location" and it will be done by the Commission. The Legislature doesn't get involved with definitions pertaining to regulations, only statutes.

If you are selling packages with some sort of location to certain bucks, get ready to see the judge.

Also, I completely disagree that outfitters would be in violation, simply by taking a client to an area where a buck may have been seen. They are selling hunts, not locations of animals. This is not the intent of the law.
 
jm77 said:
I think they should define "geographic location" and it will be done by the Commission. The Legislature doesn't get involved with definitions pertaining to regulations, only statutes.

If you are selling packages with some sort of location to certain bucks, get ready to see the judge.

Also, I completely disagree that outfitters would be in violation, simply by taking a client to an area where a buck may have been seen. They are selling hunts, not locations of animals. This is not the intent of the law.
Click to expand...
I think your comment "If you are selling packages with some sort of location to certain bucks, get ready to see the judge." is pretty much a given in this thread, as that is what the rule says. The discussion is way beyond that.

It'll be interesting to see if what they come up with for a definition. I'm guessing it'll be the same as everything found by googling "geographic location".

I changed my consulting packages more than a year ago and they no longer provide any geographic location information on any animals, so I'm not concerned, just curious what the definition will be.

My Hunt Consulting Details for Wyoming Deer.
 
Founder said:
I think your comment "If you are selling packages with some sort of location to certain bucks, get ready to see the judge." is pretty much a given in this thread, as that is what the rule says. The discussion is way beyond that.

It'll be interesting to see if what they come up with for a definition. I'm guessing it'll be the same as everything found by googling "geographic location".

I changed my consulting packages more than a year ago and they no longer provide any geographic location information on any animals, so I'm not concerned, just curious what the definition will be.

My Hunt Consulting Details for Wyoming Deer.
Click to expand...
Why do I get the impression that your package has an arrow on the map that says something like "known deer habitat"? Wink, wink
 
trail head
highlighted map
best glassing spots
best this
best that

that's pretty much a GPS location without the technical term longitude and latitude. its basically a pirate map saying X marks the spot.

whats next founder you will be wyoga member? im surprised I didn't see your name in the latest fall/winter book that they sent out a month ago
 
My packages, along with much more, have about 10 or so pins that say, "Glassing Spot", then I suggest how long to glass from each spot, where to go next, how fast, etc.
All of the high country I backpack through is known deer habitat and deer can be anywhere.

Some of my packages are based on information I've acquired in years past, some are based on information I find in recent weeks.
The fact is, I don't know for certain that game I've seen in the past will still be in the same places, so I've found that sharing a location of game actually caused some hunters to over focus on where an animal was in the past, and that's not necessarily the valuable intel. My opinion based on many, many years of big buck hunting and scouting all over that country and understanding bucks is what's valuable.
Information for opening day hunting is often a bit different than 5 days into the hunt.
A portion of what I offer in my packages is meant to replace what a guide would provide by taking a hunter hunting. But I also provide a lot of information that helps someone to pack in and hunt on their own, without the guide.
The real difference between what I provide and a guide is that he has a Forest Service permit to take a hunter up the mountain to provide the information. I don't want to take them, and can't anyway, so I provide the same information in writing.
 
Founder said:
My packages, along with much more, have about 10 or so pins that say, "Glassing Spot", then I suggest how long to glass from each spot, where to go next, how fast, etc.
All of the high country I backpack through is known deer habitat and deer can be anywhere.
Click to expand...

Its an interesting business tactic you have taken with your 'packages' as you charge $900 more for your 'Trophy' drop camp location with photos of the deer in the area vs. no photos of deer for your 'Basic' drop camp location package.
 
From Founder's Trophy Package: * Glassing Locations Graded by Importance for Biggest Buck Success

Yeah right, you may want to rephrase this one. It's very obvious what you are doing.
 
jm77 said:
From Founder's Trophy Package: * Glassing Locations Graded by Importance for Biggest Buck Success

Yeah right, you may want to rephrase this one. It's very obvious what you are doing.
Click to expand...
I don't believe they can have it both ways, that I'm guilty of selling some animals geographic location by showing George on a map "Sit here and spot", but a guide is just fine taking George to the exact same spot and telling George "Sit here and spot". No way, not without some special exception for guides.

I'll tell you what, if they define geographic location as something other than a GPS coordinate, then I will have to take a closer look at things, but if that's the case, guides will also be in violation as well.
 
Up for bid. X marks the spot to a 240" buck. Any takers? I can tell ya which drainiage. Which mnt. To glass from. Wont give ya gps coordinates but close enough

20200310_175440.jpg
 
nfh said:
Up for bid. X marks the spot to a 240" buck. Any takers? I can tell ya which drainiage. Which mnt. To glass from. Wont give ya gps coordinates but close enough
Click to expand...
My goodness that’s hilarious!!!! How did you come up with that? Wow!! ha ha :D
 
I have seen a few in that area during the summertime along the beaches but they measure more like 36x24x36. LMAO.
DD42217F-F54F-4587-8312-4F373FA475C4.jpeg
nfh said:
Up for bid. X marks the spot to a 240" buck. Any takers? I can tell ya which drainiage. Which mnt. To glass from. Wont give ya gps coordinates but close enough
Click to expand...
 
Founder, I’m no legal expert and do not have a dog in this fight. But you may want to tread lightly if this goes through. With the monetary value over $250 attached to your service you could get charged with a lacy act violation on top of whatever else they wanted to throw at you. It could get very expensive. They usually don’t go to trial from what I understand, but they will try to get a plea and take your hunting rights for a long time. They use the lacy act and the possibility of a felony conviction to twist people’s arms into a plea, usually $$$ and long time hunting and fishing privileges revoked. Again no dog in the fight personally, just another thing to consider if it does go through and become a law.
 
Commerce crossed state lines, I didn't think of that. I wonder if the hunter has to kill one of the "glassing spots" for Lacey Act to kick in?
 
jm77 said:
Commerce crossed state lines, I didn't think of that. I wonder if the hunter has to kill one of the "glassing spots" for Lacey Act to kick in?
Click to expand...

Doesn’t have to cross state lines. As soon as money (I think it’s over $250) is involved in any kind of wildlife crime, it becomes a lacy act. They added this part a while ago. Helps them go after any kind of guided hunt Where there’s a violation
 
I just heard all outfitters in Wyoming are changing what they offer. Now it's just a cot in a tent, horse rides in the afternoon and free all day buffet in tent 6.
They can't take hunters to where game is anymore because they'd be selling locations, just as they are selling that free buffet. Everyone will get charged with Lacey Act stuff and hate crimes against deer.
And don't forget CoronaVirus.
 
jm77 said:
I know you haven't completely read Wyoming's yet or you would know it's illegal to spot and locate with an aircraft; for anyone.
Click to expand...
jm77 said:
It is illegal to scout using aircraft from August 1 through Jan 31 of the following year. Are you reading the posts?
Click to expand...

Yes I read your first post. You said it’s illegal to spot and locate from an aircraft. Which isn’t true.

That’s like saying it’s illegal to hunt deer in Wyoming. Well actually no it’s not. It’s just illegal during certain times of the year.

I understand why you posted the way you did. Kind of like writing a story and leaving out the part about shooting the deer over an apple pile. Same with this. Makes it sound better to just type it’s illegal. Which is wrong. Reminds me of the media now days.

Carry on with your misinformation and chest thumping.
 
You're right, you can scout from aircraft before hunting season until July 31st. OK...

But no chest thumping here, just eye rolling. So I was trying to misinform everyone like the news media? Now I'm laughing.
 
Yes it reminded me of the media. I didn't say they try to misinform people. You said that about them. Maybe they do try maybe they don't. Maybe you tried maybe you didn't. You did in fact misinform. The media misinforms. Your post reminded me of them. Then you double down and ask if I'm even reading the posts. That reminded me of them again lol.
 
DirtyTough said:
Yes it reminded me of the media. I didn't say they try to misinform people. You said that about them. Maybe they do try maybe they don't. Maybe you tried maybe you didn't. You did in fact misinform. The media misinforms. Your post reminded me of them. Then you double down and ask if I'm even reading the posts. That reminded me of them again lol.
Click to expand...
Be easy on JM77, he’s confused and overcome with frustration and anger that I help guys have a great hunt Wyoming. ha ha :ROFLMAO:
 

Similar threads

gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 3
Replies
0
Views
231
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
Industry News and Updates
Replies
0
Views
183
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 1
Replies
0
Views
309
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Big Buck and Great Taxidermy
IMG_0031.jpeg
IMG_3102.jpeg
20200223_165616.jpg
Utah Bull Elk Hunting
Bull Elk.jpg
9095A2D3-20A5-4791-BF24-94D61342CB4E.jpeg
Big Buck with Extras for Osprey
A0E5725E-CA3A-4DEB-BE4E-F548C0453757.jpeg
20210727_112224.jpg
Big Buck
DD1BB06F-A08D-4066-9FBE-E2EAFC23CC10.jpeg

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