And the Hits just keep on coming....WY now.

This legislation if passed is no surprise. Actually began burning all my points 7 or 8 years ago in preparation. Dropped sheep. Got my money's worth with moose, deer, elk & pronghorn tags, and am positioned pretty well today as a result. Learned lesson years ago. My only adjustment would be for elk, and not a major one. Sorry to those NR's who would take a big hit.
 
I keep seeing people posting about fighting for our public lands, as if they are only good for hunting. Just because you can't draw an elk tag doesn't mean you can't come enjoy your public land.
Hunting is about the only bad habit I have left. If I wanna go look at animals I can go to a circus or a zoo. And there are plenty of places to go walk around here and Kansas.
 
If they keep raising tag costs and cutting tags the answer will be GTFO with all that.
What tags got cut(speaking strictly elk)? Allocation is still at 7250 full price as i read bill just going to be more people getting generals, dont like it or think its to pricey dont apply...more non res will have bull tags next year than this year i believe
 
It’s pretty easy for this to devolve into a pissing match of a “I just won’t apply” and “don’t let the door hit you in the ass.” The simple fact is, we all make our choices in life and we live with them, and I have no expectations some guy in Rock Springs is going to give two shits if I apply or don’t.

This isn’t about individual choices, it’s about the rapidly accelerating transformation of hunting to a rich man’s game. As much as it pains me to think this, I am quite certain by the time I’m 75, western big game hunting will be out of reach to the commoner NR, and resident hunters will have seen a drastic transition that does not bode well for the public land DIY guy.

I’ll still be a huge public land advocate, and always will be. That isn’t conditional to elk hunting. I do understand for the guy back East how it might be so. Again, we all make our choices and we live with them.

Just don’t be so naive as to think this is no big deal. It is. There absolutely is a cost of doing business for agencies that cannot be overlooked. This is messy. Decisions have consequences.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I keep seeing people posting about fighting for our public lands, as if they are only good for hunting. Just because you can't draw an elk tag doesn't mean you can't come enjoy your public land.
No thanks.

Hunting, trapping, and fishing is what has always connected me to the land that I spend time on.

I won’t let other peoples shortsightedness change that.
 
So if it's money Wyoming wants why not just raise all tag fees to Special prices and leave NR quotas the way they are? People are still going to buy all thesw tags, regardless of price.
My guess would be more broad resident support as it is. I think the average hunter is less sympathetic to nr’s when they’re thinking about potentially better draw odds for themselves.
 
Pricing increase ...sure all for it.

When access to a resource (in this case a LQ tag) is restricted...ehh, rubs me a bit the wrong way. Keeping in mind Wyoming already has a 80/20 res/non-res split...I mean goodness.
 
Managing wildlife costs continue to rise every year. If this passes, it would be benefitting wildlife. We all know hunters/ conservationist are the primary source of funding of wildlife management. I am a Wyoming resident and I hunt other western states. I know the cost when I apply. I know each state sets their own rules. I accept it and pay whatever the fee is I can afford, if I can't afford it I won't apply. As far as the tag split between residents and non residents, Wyoming would be on par with most western states.
 
i think it's a fair question.

i kinda find the argument that raising prices and limiting NR opportunity will ultimately lead to a loss of public lands advocates and the land transfer crowd ultimately winning their game a red herring.

i mean even if it did lead to hunters quitting hunting and no longer caring about public lands those numbers will still pale in comparison to the many other user groups out there besides hunters with massive numbers and massive money fighting for public lands

edit: that said, I don't think that means we should say "well who cares if we lose a few hunters" .... for whatever reason we may lose them
A LOT of those other folks who use public lands aren’t big fans of hunting. Many would like nothing more than to eliminate it. Maybe you’ll still have some of your public lands, and they’ll all be National Parks. Then you can get a job culling mountain goats out of a helicopter if you want to shoot some game. Or go to the park and watch some wolves rip apart some calves and fawns.

As we watch the country race off a cliff to undo pretty much every norm we have, it’s pretty hard for me to believe that all these western state residents think they somehow have immunity. The same people who are knocking off mountain lion and bear hunts are coming for your deer and elk hunts someday. It might be sooner than you think. I don’t understand the need to alienate your allies.
 
I grew up in NY and have been living in Wyoming for ten years now, so I have a lot of sympathy for my friends and family trying to come out and hunt with me. That being said, I don't think this state owes them tags just because they dream of western hunting. The demand simply far exceeds the supply at this point. It sucks that I might not be able to hunt with them out here in the future, but unfortunately, that's western hunting at this point.

I apply in Arizona and Nevada every year and I am fully aware that I will likely never pull the tags, or any tags, that I am looking for in those states. I would never accuse the residents of those states of being "greedy" just because I'm going to have a hard time getting a tag.
 
Yeah, all states might end up like North Dakota has been for as long as I can remember.

North Dakota gives UP TO one percent of deer tags in the state to NR. Up to one percent. Took me 18 years to draw a deer tag as a NR last year.

North Dakota gives ZERO of their big three (moose, elk, sheep) to NR. Even though for the last several years they have given out more moose tags than Montana does every year.

Sad to see things go this way.
They also host 30,000+ NR waterfowl hunters annually and have NR OTC archery deer tags for under $300...
 
I keep seeing people posting about fighting for our public lands, as if they are only good for hunting. Just because you can't draw an elk tag doesn't mean you can't come enjoy your public land.
I've been following this thread closely, mainly to see if someone would surprise me. I'm pretty confident I could name whether or not any given poster to this thread lives in a rocky mountain state. Unfortunately these topics seem to bring out the selfishness/entitlement from both directions. This particular post however, hits on something I've been wondering about. I'm hoping somebody with more knowledge/experience can answer it for me. Is it a requirement by law (either locally or federally) to allow unfettered hunting access on federally owned lands? What would it take to ban sport hunting on federal lands, in the name of safety of course, in favor of other activities that can be more widely enjoyed by the whole of the tax paying public? That is, as opposed to a violent activity practiced by a very small minority within some of the least populated states. Having some experience with this regarding HOA's and city government I'm genuinely curious as to what it would take and if the residents of these states felt support would be needed to stop it?
 
I’ve read all 254 post on this thread today, and one thought occurs to me as I’m turning in for the night: We are sure living in a golden age in the grand scheme of things when our biggest worry of the day for many of us is out of state elk hunting opportunities! God bless America.
 
What can be said that hasn’t already? I get why Wyoming would do this and they are completely within their right to do so.

But it’s hard not to feel like @JLS is right, that there are changes coming and have already come in some states that will shrink enough of the opportunity pie to cause the “Everyman” status of hunting to flicker out. Like most of you I spend a lot of time studying and dreaming about hunts, believing that one day I could have the opportunity to go on them. The ones I know I’ll never draw, I don’t think about. But when that could is made all the more small, it’s hard to maintain the energy to keep those dreams alive.

No doubt this was the case all along, but I think my energy will best be spent doubling down on advocacy for better wildlife management and hunting opportunities in my home state, and to consider hunting out of state to be an every five years kind of deal, rather than every year.
 
All this talk about pricing the common man out of hunting makes me wonder does said common man not have any hunting in their own state? Why is it a requirement that the common man hunt out of state?
 
This. Sad to see that for many public lands advocacy is thinly veneered self-interest.
What a bunch of self righteous bull shit. Self interest has never been vailed. In fact its been promoted to hilt . Watch any of Randy's videos lately? I must of missed the one where he drove across country to pick wildflowers. People protect and advocate for what they value, And rightly so. Who are you to say their personal valuation lacks substance, especially when they are helping to foot the bill while still watching their opportunity become scarce and more expensive.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top