Wyoming joins the elk wars

It honestly blows my mind that the average rancher with problem elk isn't open to or willing to allow hunters for a reasonable fee. I get it, managing people coming onto your land can be a hassle but no one is twisting their arms to be landowners. Instead, you get completely ridiculous ideas like this one where no one benefits from gunning down some elk...

You don't fix overpopulation by leasing your property to an outfitter and shooting bulls only. Some of these outfitted cow elk hunts are crazy expensive and most likely have little impact on herd size with how restrictive they are.
 
wytex said:
It is mostly private land.
We work for a rancher in this region and hunt it.
The huge herds are impressive to say the least.
The problem started by a few ranchers wanting trophy caliber bulls in this area so they gave sanctuary to herds later in season.
This was about 35 years ago we first heard of these sanctuary ranches but they had been doing this for years before.

Yes , once they herd up it is hard to get on them and take several out a the group but it can be done.
I would also venture if I called and asked about access I would be told no even though we have 30+ year experience hunting this area and work for a rancher in it. Some LOs just don't trust anyone but those they know very well or family.
The guy we work for says no to hunters unless they are friends of ours and we hunt with them. Their biggest concern is liability and not wanting folks just wondering around. However elk are scarce by mid Oct these days- headed to those sanctuary ranches by then.
WG&F GWs and biologists know who we are and who we work for but we never got a call to go shoot any elk last Feb. could have been there in minutes and we know the area.

They need to do something but access is the issue and will not go away unless they pay big to LOs I think. They tried G&F "guided" hunts a few years back and they went so so I think. G&F folks were out on the ranches with hunters.

This is also a very open country area in most of it but it is rough . Plenty of cover and terrain for stalking up on herds.
This is a pretty common herds size in this area, we took 2 elk out of it. This was 2011 so herds have increased now even. Pic shows about half the herd.

View attachment 280656
Click to expand...

@wytex nailed it, btw.

Until we recognize that some people won't let anyone on regardless of what it does to others, the issue will always have people searching for the easiest solution.

The reality here is that the politics of all of this make it far more complex than it should be. MT tried for a long time to play the access card between hunters and landowners. A few incentive based solutions have worked well (PAL hit over 500,000 acres of landlocked public land being opened up in under 4 years).

Until neighbors start having difficult conversations with the neighbors who cause these issues, or until the state makes engaging with the agency a mandate, then I doubt any state will get to the heart of the issue without having the boldest go immediately to transferable licenses.
 
Last edited:
SaskHunter said:
It honestly blows my mind that the average rancher with problem elk isn't open to or willing to allow hunters for a reasonable fee. I get it, managing people coming onto your land can be a hassle but no one is twisting their arms to be landowners. Instead, you get completely ridiculous ideas like this one where no one benefits from gunning down some elk...

You don't fix overpopulation by leasing your property to an outfitter and shooting bulls only. Some of these outfitted cow elk hunts are crazy expensive and most likely have little impact on herd size with how restrictive they are.
Click to expand...
Its a lot easier to cash damage checks than to manager hunters...
 
Ben, heard our LO say just last year he guessed some folks were having elk problems. Ya think?
Hard to sway say an 85 yr old rancher to change his ways.
He once mentioned that if cow licenses were cheaper they would sell more, I simply stated the folks had no where to hunt those elk when they get a tag. Oh, he said.
They need to find a way to break up the herds, harassing them perhaps and access.
I think the right amount of $$ offered may change a few minds on allowing hunters in.

There are hundreds of left over cow calf licenses every year for this area because of no access. Allowing LOs to transfer their 2 licenses will do no good.
We personally don't need say 6 elk for our family, but may start trying to put down all we can when we can.
I would agree to giving every elk license holder in areas 6 and 7 an additional cow tag free and give LOs incentive to allow multiple harvests by hunters. That may however encourage hunters that don't have access lined up to apply and take tags from those who do have access.
The auxiliary hunts could also help but they need access for those too.
How many times did I mention access?
 
perhaps a contributing factor to ranchers not allowing folks to hunt to "solve" the problem is the paycheck they get from the state. Then they can double dip by having outfitters shoot bulls on the property. So what may be happening here is they get incentive to keep elk there only hunted by whomever they want. Usually creating a lot less pressure. The incentive to get paid to allow hunters vs the incentive to allow the elk, and let the state pay you for damages must not make sense financially. Especially after 20 or 30 hunters Pay 8,000-10,000k for a bull elk hunt. Depending on how good their accountant is they may pay very little in taxes.

Its a mess
 
Fire up the national guard choppers and chase the herds towards public. I'll get my popcorn.
 
338win said:
Fire up the national guard choppers and chase the herds towards public. I'll get my popcorn.
Click to expand...
Lets just say they used to train during the elk season and messed up a few hunts then. Nothing like making a nice stalk on a big herd and then here comes the choppers at about 100 ft.
Had one fly over the ranch couple of weeks ago and I think they got spooked when they saw us, they headed over the ridge back to the highway right of way.
We don't need them low flying during bighorn, elk and deer calving and fawning seasons.
They could help late season though , (y). Elk sure do not like their low flights.
 
wytex said:
Ben, heard our LO say just last year he guessed some folks were having elk problems. Ya think?
Hard to sway say an 85 yr old rancher to change his ways.
He once mentioned that if cow licenses were cheaper they would sell more, I simply stated the folks had no where to hunt those elk when they get a tag. Oh, he said.
They need to find a way to break up the herds, harassing them perhaps and access.
I think the right amount of $$ offered may change a few minds on allowing hunters in.

There are hundreds of left over cow calf licenses every year for this area because of no access. Allowing LOs to transfer their 2 licenses will do no good.
We personally don't need say 6 elk for our family, but may start trying to put down all we can when we can.
I would agree to giving every elk license holder in areas 6 and 7 an additional cow tag free and give LOs incentive to allow multiple harvests by hunters. That may however encourage hunters that don't have access lined up to apply and take tags from those who do have access.
The auxiliary hunts could also help but they need access for those too.
How many times did I mention access?
Click to expand...

I hear the exact same things in MT. I'm sure the ID, CO, NM, NV, WA, OR, CA guys all hear the same thing.

The cost for access is the biggest issue. I genuinely appreciate the WY model, but it's not opened up a ton of land compared to other systems. The quality of the hunt may most-assuredly be better, but are the outcomes for management being met on a broad scale? Is the payment enough?

Going through the WGFD report, they spent a ton of money on game damage & on other programs that are essentially trying to keep wildlife off of private land. Perhaps a better approach would be the reward landowners who offer habitat and provide access? While each state is going through similar issues, I am not naïve enough to think that other states' solutions are easily imported. However, when you look at over $5 million for game damage and just $2 million for Access Yes, there's something catty-wompus on how the approach should be. Perhaps, rather than looking at political ways to reduce the herd, WY could start looking at how other states incentivize access, deal with wildlife damage, etc would be warranted, rather than going to transferable tags.
The 2024 session is going to be interesting in Wyoming. Thank god for the super-majority rule on introducing non-budget bills.
 
wytex said:
I would agree to giving every elk license holder in areas 6 and 7 an additional cow tag free and give LOs incentive to allow multiple harvests by hunters. That may however encourage hunters that don't have access lined up to apply and take tags from those who do have access.
The auxiliary hunts could also help but they need access for those too.
How many times did I mention access?
Click to expand...
Why do I think the task force will recommend BOGO cow tags with every Type 1 hunt booked with an outfitter as the answer to this issue, WY guides are aready pissed booking with MT guide gets you 2 pp....smh

I think a good start is to prorate damage amounts based on the amount of public access you allow.

They also need to prorate graising fees on land locked public for those that don't allow public access. The more landlocked acreage you don't allow access the higher the fees.
 
Last edited:
sccritterkiller said:
Why do I think the task force will recommend BOGO cow tags with every Type 1 hunt booked with an outfitter as the answer to this issue, they are aready pissed booking with MT guide gets you 2 pp....smh
Click to expand...
What Task Force?
 
I know nowhere near about this situation as some of these other guys, but I've seen a few of the meetings discussing the overpopulation in these regions.

For sure LO limiting access is a big issue. I recall an HMA where we were called (sometimes with pretty short notice) to go hunt. We had to sit through an orientation of sorts and go over landowner expectations. Given instructions if we found elk to call the access coordinator to get as many people around the herd as possible before we started shooting. I am sure some outfitter offered more money to this LO than G&F could swing for access, and that's why it's no longer an option. I find it so hard to believe that access could have been revoked due to some sort of violation on a hunters part i.e, leaving a gate open, driving closed roads, etc.

I have suggested holders of type 1 and type 4 tags in these areas be allowed to utilize type 6 (often access restricted tags). Say you draw a 6-1, you hunt on national forest for your bull. A type 6 tag is only good off national forest, so you can't use it there even though there's leftovers every year. Still would limit overcrowding of hunters, still would have an enjoyable LQ type hunt, but be able to help knock down those herds in a more effective manner. The response was "these herds in these areas aren't the 'problem' elk". As if they don't migrate or cross boundaries.

Even allowing hunters to hold more than the 3 elk tags currently allowed I don't know would do much good. With the exception of Buzz, I doubt many hunters are killing their 3 elk annually as allowed, but I bet he'd be good for knocking down a couple more every year if allowed by law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ben Lamb
Goopy bits
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
OntarioHunter
OntarioHunter
Jape
Bondurant Billionaire Land Swap
Replies
1
Views
717
flatcoat
flatcoat
COEngineer
Corner Crossing BHA Amicus Brief
Replies
5
Views
2K
Dougfirtree
Dougfirtree
WYelker
New Res will be a negative impact on Big Game!!!
Replies
2
Views
1K
WYelker
WYelker

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
114,023
Messages
2,041,493
Members
36,431
Latest member
Nick3252

Share this page

Back
Top