Wyoming G&F Improvements

I'm being sarcastic. Your idea to expand wolves for better hunting is about on par with the film professing the "rebirth " of Yellowstone because of wolf reintroduction.

About the only thing I agree with you on this post is that NR hunters have a higher success percentage than residents. Many of your other ideas and statements are wrong.

Let me list some as examples:
LQ areas increase herd size- it may increase buck numbers, but does nothing to increase does and fawns, which would be required to increase herd size..
More bucks mean more does bred- not true unless buck/doe is under 10/100 and I'm not sure where that could be, it certainly isn't in the area you are talking about.
You have seen it "clearly stated" that corner crossing is illegal-this is totally false as the legality or illegality of cc is anything but clear, as there currently is no statute or regulation
that addresses this issue.

Mate I never said more wolves would make hunting better, all I said was that you can't say hunting will be totally ruined with wolves on the landscape. And I think it would be cool to have more of them on the landscape. They would be regulated as they currently are so they wouldn't get out of hand. And yes, Yellowstone is a total wasteland now with wolves and grizzlies.

Most of my wrong posts that you mention I clearly stated I could be wrong or outdated and apparently I am. I come here to learn and ask questions and am definitely doing so! So thank you for helping me further my understanding!!
 
the legality or illegality of cc is anything but clear, as there currently is no statute or regulation
that addresses this issue.

While I agree this topic is jumbled, you don't need a specific cc statute to make it illegal, existing trespass laws already cover (http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_0848ffe6-200c-11e1-8b59-001871e3ce6c.html). While I hope a current court would move past the old approaches that found that merely passing over someone else's "air space" was trespass, the discussion starts there - corner crossing has historically been trespass under standard real property regimes. Fortunately it looks like some are willing to revisit, either by statute or by challenging in court.
 
While I agree this topic is jumbled, you don't need a specific cc statute to make it illegal, existing trespass laws already cover (http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_0848ffe6-200c-11e1-8b59-001871e3ce6c.html). While I hope a current court would move past the old approaches that found that merely passing over someone else's "air space" was trespass, the discussion starts there - corner crossing has historically been trespass under standard real property regimes. Fortunately it looks like some are willing to revisit, either by statute or by challenging in court.

Please cite a better source than an outdated news article quoting Bob Wharff and an overzealous and incorrect title. There has been no court in Wyoming that has found passing over one's airspace as illegal, that is of course, unless you are bothering someone's peace and privacy in a low flying airplane!

Wow, please do better with your argument than relying on the uninformed press.
 
Please cite a better source than an outdated news article quoting Bob Wharff and an overzealous and incorrect title. There has been no court in Wyoming that has found passing over one's airspace as illegal, that is of course, unless you are bothering someone's peace and privacy in a low flying airplane!

Wow, please do better with your argument than relying on the uninformed press.

Wow, the Attorney General opinion still stands as I understand, so that is enough for most. I am not aware of anyone taking this specific issue to a full appellate court review, but trespass laws across the land for decades have been extremely stringent and rarely if ever provide for a "de minimus" allowance. It gets as silly as the Supreme Court ruling that the presence of a 1/4" coax cable across the roof of a condo unit (even if suspended), a roof that could not be seen or accessed directly by the tenant, was sufficient to be considered trespass. I believe the correct reading in 2018 should be that corner crossing is de minimus in light of the larger public interest in access to public lands, and as such is not criminal or civil trespass, but I am guessing lawyers in Wyoming are not routinely advising their clients of that in light of the AG opinion.
 
Wow, the Attorney General opinion still stands as I understand, so that is enough for most. I am not aware of anyone taking this specific issue to a full appellate court review, but trespass laws across the land for decades have been extremely stringent and rarely if ever provide for a "de minimus" allowance. It gets as silly as the Supreme Court ruling that the presence of a 1/4" coax cable across the roof of a condo unit (even if suspended), a roof that could not be seen or accessed directly by the tenant, was sufficient to be considered trespass. I believe the correct reading in 2018 should be that corner crossing is de minimus in light of the larger public interest in access to public lands, and as such is not criminal or civil trespass, but I am guessing lawyers in Wyoming are not routinely advising their clients of that in light of the AG opinion.

You obviously have not read the AG opinion with care. What's the difference between "is" illegal or "may be" illegal?
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,576
Messages
2,025,556
Members
36,237
Latest member
SCOOTER848
Back
Top