Podcast - request for topics

[Whiptail]

Feds can't do that. They lack the right to do so. The 10th Amendment would be invoked and used to keep this right as a state right. They own the land, but they don't have anything to do with the setting of Wyoming hunting regulations (yet). And the last thing I would want would be the Federal government thinking they have a role/right to intervene with state hunting regulations.

I don't think the 10th Amendment gives residents the "right" to hunt on Federal land...or any land for that matter. Hunting, especially on Federal land, is a privilege that can be taken away. Can you imagine how private landowners would react if they had the same restrictions placed on them? The states can make hunting regulations all day long but that doesn't give residents the right to hunt on private or Federal land.

On a separate topic, I find it incongruent of you to want the Feds to manage public lands because the states are too corrupt but then say the Feds are the last ones you want to manage hunting regulations. I would say that if the State can't be trusted to manage land then it can't be trusted to manage wildlife as evidenced by the Wilderness law in Wyoming.

 

[Big Fin]

I don't think the 10th Amendment gives residents the "right" to hunt on Federal land...or any land for that matter. Hunting, especially on Federal land, is a privilege that can be taken away. Can you imagine how private landowners would react if they had the same restrictions placed on them? The states can make hunting regulations all day long but that doesn't give residents the right to hunt on private or Federal land.

On a separate topic, I find it incongruent of you to want the Feds to manage public lands because the states are too corrupt but then say the Feds are the last ones you want to manage hunting regulations. I would say that if the State can't be trusted to manage land then it can't be trusted to manage wildlife as evidenced by the Wilderness law in Wyoming.

You may not think the 10th Amendment gives residents the "right to hunt ......." according to the rules of their state, but the courts do. So, I guess that is what matters. If you doubt the states are granted the right to determine who gets to hunt and who doesn't, at what price or what discount, then I suggest you read the volumes of court cases that say so. Don't take my word for it.

As to private landowners,they could have the same restriction placed upon them if ever a state were stupid enough to make hunting tags off limits on public land; the dumbest idea anyone could ever dream up. A state would be fools to even think about such a crazy idea, so to use that scenario in this discussion is moot. But, states set the rules of where your tag is valid, by resident of non-resident, etc. If you doubt that, look at states that give resident landowners a tag for their deeded private lands, but they do not give non-resident landowners a tag for their deeded private lands. Lots of examples where states can make statutes that apply to private v. public lands.

Nobody is saying that states can control all that happens on private or Federal land. They don't own those lands. States are not vested in that right.

But, they can place restrictions on what, where, who, and at what price people enjoy the wildlife the state holds in trust for its citizens. Exactly what WY has done with the absurd wilderness restriction on non-residents. Without a tag that is valid for where you are standing, it doesn't matter who owns the land, you are not allowed to legally take wildlife. In that reality, a reality supported by the courts, the states hold the power to do what is the topic of this most recent topic, WY wilderness restrictions.

You are more than welcome to find it incongruent that I support state's rights in wildlife and Federal ownership of land, two different rights held by two different governments, but that is how the courts currently hold it to be in this country. It is how the rules have been in this country since long before my family came to this country from Scandinavia 110 years ago.

I have no problem with state management of assets, if it is really about management of the lands in a way that is beneficial to all. If you think the effort to transfer Federal lands to the states is about management, then we will disagree. Unless, you classify sale and disposal of management.

Make no mistake, it is completely about disposal and granting to their friends. Whenever we ask these "transfer" politicians if they would restrict the deeds such that any sale/disposal by the state would restrict the deed to provide perpetual public access, they fly off the handle. They have every excuse why perpetual access cannot be provided. We point to them all the mechanisms by which perpetual access could be provided under a transfer scenario. When we do, they change the subject.

When we ask them to change rules that restrict recreation and hunting access on state lands to make that access similar to what we enjoy on Federal lands, they balk. They have a long list of reasons as to why state lands need the access restrictions that currently exist. I was in the fight to allow hunting access to state lands in MT in the late 1990's. We offered to pay a fee for that access and they still bitched, even though maximizing revenue is the Constitutional mandate for those lands. They don't want those lands open to the public as they are now.

Since they started this movement 40 years ago, they pitched it as "sale of public lands." Yet, when they learned that "sale of these lands" was rejected by Americans, they repackaged it as "transfer." Same people, same motives, same story. Feel free to believe them, if you want. I don't. And that is why I support Federal ownership of those lands, in spite of the many instances I would like to see better management of Federal lands.

If you think states are not qualified to manage wildlife, then I suggest you get lawyered up to change the 10th Amendment and override all of the court cases that vest that right in wildlife to the states as trustee for the citizens of their state.

 

[Whiptail]

Wow, thanks for the long response!

I was just pointing out that hunting requires both land and wildlife. Since the land is Federally owned and the wildlife is state owned then there is room for negotiation but the Feds haven't. The 10th Amendment certainly doesn't give state residents the right to hunt Federal land. How much hunting is taking place in Yellowstone? The landowner gets to decide if hunting will be allowed and the state gets to decide if permits will be issued(to who, when, and for how much).

To be clear, I don't think states are unqualified to manage wildlife rather I was pointing out that you distrust states to manage land(for good reason) yet you distrust the Feds(I'm not sure why) to manage wildlife. Wyoming and other states have shown that they will be as selfish as possible with hunting permits and until the landowners(Feds) stand up to these policies nothing will happen.

 

[BuzzH]

Whiptail,

There is a distinct difference between land management and wildlife management.

The ONLY thing that a landowner can control in Wyoming, is if they allow hunting or not. That's it, they cant feed wildlife, they cant issue tags for wildlife, etc. etc.

The Feds are not likely going to stand in the way of how the states choose to manage their resources, issue tags, etc...usually.

The reason that I don't want the feds managing wildlife is because they would manage under a completely different mandate, for one. Another big deal is that funding would have to be received via a federal allocation/budget. I bet that would be a real goat rope and wildlife funding would be at the mercy of the political machine in D.C. The land management agencies are under attack constantly regarding funding, there is nothing that would convince me that wildlife funding would be any different.

Plus, land management agencies and the various State GF agencies tend to work pretty well with each other.

While I also strongly dislike Wyomings wilderness guide law, what you're suggesting (federal control of all wildlife) would have much worse impacts on all of us as hunters...as well as the wildlife.

Of course Wyoming and other states are going to take care of their resident hunters first...we live here, we attend meetings, we pay taxes here, we volunteer our time for wildlife here, join local organizations, etc. etc. etc.

But, to clarify, you're barking up the wrong tree if you think WY is even close to the most selfish...they issue 25% of their sheep permits, 20% of their moose permits, 25% of goat tags, 18% of their LQ elk tags, etc. etc. NR's typically receive more than 50% of the available pronghorn permits, have access to all the leftover elk, deer, and pronghorn tags, etc.

You'll be hard pressed to find a state that is more generous to the NR hunter than Wyoming...and if you're only bitch is that you cant hunt a tiny portion of Wyoming that is designated wilderness...you really don't have anything to complain about.

 

[Josh Kuntz]

I would like to hear some discussion on how hunting practices and ethics evolve from one generation to the next. On a personal level, in what ways do you hunt differently from your father or grandfather? On a macro level, what does today's hunting community do differently than the previous generations of hunters?

It brings up interesting questions about whether we (the hunting community) is trending in a positive or negative direction.

It may also be an optimistic reminder that very positive change can come from one generation to the next. As an example, I was raised in a family that had very loose hunting ethics and were frequent abusers of public lands. As I grew older and was exposed to other influences besides my family, I evolved and was able to re-shape my beliefs and practices. I think there is an inaccurate dogma that people raised with a poor value system will continue to perpetuate those values. That is not always the case.

I am loving the podcast, keep up the great work!

 

[Tylerm]

As someone that grew up in Wyoming hunting and fishing all over the state the disconnect for me is I can't legally hunt areas that I have hunted my entire life even if I pay 10x or more for the same license.

I could for example go climb The Grand in the dead of winter by myself and in many cases put other people at risk and spend thousand of dollars in rescue fees if I get stuck. But as soon as I pick up a bow and step into the wilderness I am breaking the law.

I agree that Wyoming is more than generous to non residents in tag allotments but non resident fees also fund carry a lot of the wildlife management costs for the state as well.

Its frustrating when one of my dream hunts is a backpack Sheep hunt in the Winds which I have spent most of my time in growing up from Pinedale to South pass and to do this hunt now I have to rely on someone one else when I feel I am more than capable of doing this hunt myself.

It is a subsidy for Wyoming Outfitters plain and simple, I have a hard time believing that it protects WY residents in any way.

But I am for the most part preaching to the choir on Hunt Talk. Personally I believe the worst thing that could happen is these Federal lands being handed over to the states I think it would be a death blow for hunting in the West. Also in general I am glad that the Feds don't have more control over state wildlife management

I was just wondering if anyone has ever seriously challenged it and it looks like Randy has already looked into it. That's why I love this Forum.

 

[BuzzH]

I agree that Wyoming is more than generous to non residents in tag allotments but non resident fees also fund carry a lot of the wildlife management costs for the state as well.

Cant disagree with anything else in your post but this...its the most over-played hand in the argument against the Wilderness guide law and anything else that isn't in the favor of the NR hunter.

In a GF budget of 80-81 million, around 22 million is from NR license, point fees, application fees, etc. So about 25% of the budget is funded via NR fees.

Resident expenditures for licenses, application fees, point fees, etc. are about 9.5 million.

Much of the rest of the budget is from state and/or federal sources, grants, interest, etc.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Cant disagree with anything else in your post but this...its the most over-played hand in the argument against the Wilderness guide law and anything else that isn't in the favor of the NR hunter.

In a GF budget of 80-81 million, around 22 million is from NR license, point fees, application fees, etc. So about 25% of the budget is funded via NR fees.

Resident expenditures for licenses, application fees, point fees, etc. are about 9.5 million.

Much of the rest of the budget is from state and/or federal sources, grants, interest, etc.

And you don't think 25% is a big deal? I believe about 75%-80% of the hunting/fishing fees the G&F takes in comes from NRs and make up that 25% that you don't seem to feel is much! Anyway, if our member wants to hunt where he stated and has all that expertise he can get a resident to sign off on the G&F form and take him into that wilderness area he wants to hunt for free, since that is an option we have without paying a fortune to an outfitter that may have helped get that boondoggle of a law passed in the first place!

 

[BuzzH]

Topgun,

Try reading for once before you post. I never said NR fees weren't an important part of the budget, only that its a severely over-played hand every time a NR doesn't agree with how WY chooses to manage its wildlife.

NR license fees are 65-70% of the total license revenue.

When you look at the GF budget, residents are picking up a majority of the total tab...

 

[Nameless Range]

I feel like we are overdue for a podcast.

Things to possibly discuss: the clown-car militia, the expansion of bison habitat and your own personal experiences hunting bison, and some thoughts on the the recent griz proposals.

 

[Northwoods Labs]

I've heard you mention a few times that you know Ted Kerasote. I think he would be a really good guest on your podcast. Being a dog guy I've obviously really enjoyed his book Merle's Door and his newest book on canine health. However, I have not read Bloodties so I'll have to check that one out

 

[Big Fin]

I've heard you mention a few times that you know Ted Kerasote. I think he would be a really good guest on your podcast. Being a dog guy I've obviously really enjoyed his book Merle's Door and his newest book on canine health. However, I have not read Bloodties so I'll have to check that one out

Yes, I know Ted very well. He and I served on a Board for four years. We have hunted together many times. We had a long-term business relationship. We shared dinner early this month when I was near his home and trying to fill my bison tag. Ted is one of the greatest thinkers hunting had. Unfortunately, when someone thinks and writes, some genres are not keen on having their biases questioned and they reject someone pushing our minds to think a different way. I cannot say that is why Ted decided to start writing dog books that have spent months on the NY Times Best Seller list, but I know some give me awkward glances when I mention how much my conversations with Ted forced me to look at my own actions with deeper consideration.

It was my family that got me into hunting. It has been friends who have taught me the most about western hunting. It is Ted who helped me look at hunting from the perspective I currently do, even if he and I will have different perspectives at times on some issues of hunting.

As for him being on the Podcast, the thought has entered my mind many times. He and I talked about it this month. He offered that anything he can do to help me give a positive tone to the hunting message, he would do. So, it might happen down the road.

If anyone wants to read a very good piece about hunters and our strong feelings for taking responsibility of our own food and put that in the context of the vegan who finds moral superiority in their food choice, read the chapter titled "Whom Shall We Eat?" in Ted's most recent book, Pukka's Promise. For some context, the majority of Ted's dog book readers are urbanites, a majority female, with many having a strong attachment to animal welfare. For Ted to write as eloquently as he does about his absolute conviction to taking responsibility for his own food acquisition through hunting, at the risk of alienating his core readership, is to be commended.

If you are interested in that Chapter, a chapter I read often, here is a link to the book - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...G7574&ref_=as_sl_pc_ss_til&tag=onyouownadv-20

 

[mtmiller]

WY BHA BUZZ. I would pay $20 for an hour and half of that podcast.

 

[Big Fin]

WY BHA BUZZ. I would pay $20 for an hour and half of that podcast.

He promised me that he would do so when he came to MT this year. I had hoped to get him, Greenhorn, and PSinclair to talk elk hunting. So far, no takers. I might need to offer a higher quality beer than PBR.

 

[Big Sky Dreamin]

He promised me that he would do so when he came to MT this year. I had hoped to get him, Greenhorn, and PSinclair to talk elk hunting. So far, no takers. I might need to offer a higher quality beer than PBR.

Offer them a taste from the homeland.

Hamm's!

 

[JCS]

They still make Hamms? These glasses have to be from the 70's

 

[tylert23]

Volume

I often drive a good distance occasionally and enjoy listening to your podcast while I drove. The past three though I either had a hard time listening or couldn't at all due to the volume being so low even when my phone and speaker where at max volume. Is there a way you could upload future ones at a higher volume? Thank you

 

[dustinf]

If you have any interest in discussing wilderness skills, I know a guy.

 

[zhetrick]

really like to hear the conversations when you have on guys from companies that talk about the product and how to use them the most like Leupold, Howa, maybe the tent company. Always like to hear about the gear used and the stuff that works. I'm always wanting to know more about packs and which one best fits what situation (day hunts, backpack trips, packing out game meat). Spotting scope choices (angled or straight, low power or higher power).

what about one with Uncle Larry. He is always a hoot.

 

[skifunk2]

If I have missed this topic anywhere, here on the forums, on your podcast or even in the videos, please let me know.....

Long distance scouting.... How you truly use Google Earth/Topo Maps/ etc. to decide what areas you are going to hunt in a given(unknown) area. I understand the food-water-shelter aspect and can read a topo map like everyone else. What I'd really like to understand is "the why" you chose to hunt a certain draw vs. the next one over. Or, this valley compared to the one 5 miles away that looks to have the same characteristics on map.