Generosity to non-residents

[runningmt]

Interesting thread, “Generosity to Nonresident Hunters” , are you kidding. As Wyoming cuts nonresident tags for trophy species, Wyoming residents seem to be forgetting a few important facts. Most all of big game hunting done by nonresidents in Wyoming is done on Federal Land, National Forest, Bureau of Land Management and Wilderness areas owned by all Americans…. Nonresident license fees fund a majority of their State Game and Fish…. But the real picture includes the fact that Nonresidents fund Wyoming’s General Fund to the tune of 25%. A quarter of Wyoming’s budget for roads, schools, hospitals, police and the like come out of Nonresidents pockets….. Sounds fair that Nonresidents should get only 10 % of the licenses…??. To Wyoming hunters who want to get rid of Nonresidents I have to ask why? When your son was on a mountain in Afghanistan was it not a Nonresident fighting next to him…. How about that Nonresident Surgeon at Mayo Clinic in Minnesota that saved your father’s life when they did a Whipple Procedure to remove his pancreatic cancer… No Surgeon in Wyoming has that skill.. And yes, Minnesota heavily funds Mayo Clinic and they do not ask what State you reside in, charge you more or limit the numbers of nonresidents. Perhaps fairness is no longer a virtue that many people have any more… And yes, I know that the Federal Government gave the States the right to ”Manage” the wildlife within their borders but that is not an absolute right and has been modified by the Supreme Court multiple times… I think another modification might be coming within a few years….. We are all in this together, lets try to be fair to each other…….

The same could be said for Midwest/Eastern States

But in states like ND, SD, NE, the NR opportunities are effectively ZERO for almost everything

At least the western states have set aside 10% for NR

In fairness, ND has more moose tags than MT, yet no tags are offered to NR. MT gives moose tags to NR.

Everyone looks to the west to be generous, while their home states are anything but.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

The same could be said for Midwest/Eastern States

But in states like ND, SD, NE, the NR opportunities are effectively ZERO for almost everything

At least the western states have set aside 10% for NR

In fairness, ND has more moose tags than MT, yet no tags are offered to NR. MT gives moose tags to NR.

Everyone looks to the west to be generous, while their home states are anything but.

The point of this discussion is nonresident hunting on FEDERAL LANDS, PERIOD. The midwest and east coast states have very little Federal Lands….. One should also look at Federal Support of State Budgets with Federal Funds…. Most of the Western States are heavily dependent on Federal Monies to run their States…….. Wyoming and Montana are heavily dependent on Federal (Nonresident) money. … Look it up….. Also read this law review

Fish and Wildlife Management on Federal Lands Debunking State Supremacy

Environmental Law Vol. 47 No 4 2017

 

[BuzzH]

The point of this discussion is nonresident hunting on FEDERAL LANDS, PERIOD. The midwest and east coast states have very little Federal Lands….. One should also look at Federal Support of State Budgets with Federal Funds…. Most of the Western States are heavily dependent on Federal Monies to run their States…….. Wyoming and Montana are heavily dependent on Federal (Nonresident) money. … Look it up….. Also read this law review

Fish and Wildlife Management on Federal Lands Debunking State Supremacy

Environmental Law Vol. 47 No 4 2017

Land ownership and wildlife ownership are two entirely different things.

Look it up.

 

[DFS]

The point of this discussion is nonresident hunting on FEDERAL LANDS, PERIOD. The midwest and east coast states have very little Federal Lands….. One should also look at Federal Support of State Budgets with Federal Funds…. Most of the Western States are heavily dependent on Federal Monies to run their States…….. Wyoming and Montana are heavily dependent on Federal (Nonresident) money. … Look it up…..

Your next trip to your federal lands out west you might be shooting deer with a camera. Plenty of ways to enjoy public land.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

Your next trip to your federal lands out west you might be shooting deer with a camera. Plenty of ways to enjoy public land.

I am pretty sure this will end up in Federal Court.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

Your next trip to your federal lands out west you might be shooting deer with a camera. Plenty of ways to enjoy public land.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

You really should read the Law Journal Review published in Environmental Law…….

Perhaps the most prudent thing to do would be to leave everything the way it is and has been for years……..

 

[BuzzH]

Text - S.339 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005

Text for S.339 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005

www.congress.gov

 

[thusby]

If I gotta move to Sundance to hunt Wyoming, then I forsake hunting!

 

[runningmt]

The point of this discussion is nonresident hunting on FEDERAL LANDS, PERIOD.

Huh?

Look at the original thread post….not a word about land type.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

Text - S.339 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005

Text for S.339 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005

www.congress.gov

The Bill was introduced in the Senate and the House, according to. The Government Website it NEVER PASSED AND BECAME LAW… only introduced"………………..

 

[BuzzH]

The Bill was introduced in the Senate and the House, according to. The Government Website it NEVER PASSED AND BECAME LAW… only introduced"………………..

It passed.

Look it up.

 

[JLS]

The Bill was introduced in the Senate and the House, according to. The Government Website it NEVER PASSED AND BECAME LAW… only introduced"………………..

Good grief. It passed. It was introduced in response to a litany of lawsuits filed by USO, alleging a violation of the Commerce Clare of the US constitution.

 

[Muledeerchaser]

Good grief. It passed. It was introduced in response to a litany of lawsuits filed by USO, alleging a violation of the Commerce Clare of the US constitution.

According to the Government Website it did not

 

[Big Fin]

This debate reminds me of the Zuckerberg University legal experts who read one or two paragraphs of the Constitution and proclaim the Federal courts were wrong when they affirmed (dozens of times) that Federal ownership of land is constitutional. I tell them, "If it's so wrong, then get lawyered up and correct this Constitutional injustice." None of them seem to have the money or interest to prove their case.

This topic follows the same path. A small group of attorneys publish a legal thesis to support their claim that the 10th Amendment does not give states the trustee responsibility for wildlife management. They have a personal agenda for wanting a Federal system of wildlife management. The thesis is then promoted by a few folks who didn't get their tag this year and now we get told that the multitude of court cases affirming that 10th Amendment right were all incorrect decisions.

Ok, if those are incorrect decisions, then get lawyered up and get this injustice corrected. If state trusteed wildlife management is that obvious as a Constitutional miscarriage, it shouldn't take much legal work to get it fixed. Get the case filed, the court rulings in place, and problem solved.

Carry on ........

 

[Muledeerchaser]

This debate reminds me of the Zuckerberg University legal experts who read one or two paragraphs of the Constitution and proclaim the Federal courts were wrong when they affirmed (dozens of times) that Federal ownership of land is constitutional. I tell them, "If it's so wrong, then get lawyered up and correct this Constitutional injustice." None of them seem to have the money or interest to prove their case.

This topic follows the same path. A small group of attorneys publish a legal thesis to support their claim that the 10th Amendment does not give states the trustee responsibility for wildlife management. They have a personal agenda for wanting a Federal system of wildlife management. The thesis is then promoted by a few folks who didn't get their tag this year and now we get told that the multitude of court cases affirming that 10th Amendment right were all incorrect decisions.

Ok, if those are incorrect decisions, then get lawyered up and get this injustice corrected. If state trusteed wildlife management is that obvious as a Constitutional miscarriage, it shouldn't take much legal work to get it fixed. Get the case filed, the court rulings in place, and problem solved.

Carry on ........

 

[Muledeerchaser]

I quess your special interest is Public Land Hunting….. So is mine…. I do enjoy a good debate without any name calling….

 

[Muledeerchaser]

According to the Government Website it did not

According to the Government Website it did not

Government Website see attachment

 

[BuzzH]

Government Website see attachment

It passed.

That simple.

Care to make a wager or do you need more time to look it up?

 

[BuzzH]

I quess your special interest is Public Land Hunting….. So is mine…. I do enjoy a good debate without any name calling….

When there isn't a debate to be had?