Anyone applying WY general with 4 or more points?

TheCougar

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
1,512
Location
Fort Worth, TX
I have never felt unwelcome in Wyoming by anyone whenever I have been there. Especially @BuzzH ! I didn't know him from Adam and he didn't know me at the same rate. The first time we spoke was in person in the field, not here or anywhere else online. Yet he was extremely pleasant, interesting, informative and last but certainly not least courteous. If there was a time for a resident to be curt, dismissive and uncourteous toward a non resident it was then. There wasn't anybody around for miles. No, it was absolutely the opposite. @BuzzH is NOT against non residents.

You say you don't remember a large push for "more opportunity" but you have a problem with the restrictive wilderness laws in Wyoming. There are many threads about Wyoming wilderness laws and plenty of non residents pushing for change. Yes, you did admit you dislike the means more than the actual end result. I don't understand that, but whatever makes it more palatable for you I guess. I would venture to say that the reason the Wyoming wilderness is so great and sought after is partly the exclusivity as well as the sound game management paired together which helps make the recipe so sweet. If the wilderness law was removed and the flood gates were opened, I can't imagine that not having a negative impact. The fact is people can and will be whiney ungrateful nonresidents, I see it and read it more than I should (not directing that on you). People buy houses by airports and then bitch and moan about the noise then file lawsuits. People also move into HOA's knowing all the rules and regulations yet still the fists go flying in the air shaking. I don't get it.

I'm not attacking you with this post @TheCougar. I haven't met you in person, but we've shared information and had some good communications in the last few years. I take you as a good, honest, moral individual with good character. I'd more than likely go hunt with you (if you'd have me) if the stars lined up to do so.These are just my observations and opinions. Thanx.
I didn’t mean to imply that Buzz dislikes nonresidents, so apologies if it came off that way. It just seemed like his posts were contradictory regarding NR, and I wanted to understand the genesis of his issues with apparent fatigue at defending, for lack of a better term, NRs.

When I referred to a large push for “more opportunity”, I was specifically talking about an increase in tags, since that is what Buzz seemed to be talking about in a couple of his previous posts. I know it is nonsensical to feel the way I do about the Wilderness rule - I just hate when public land is treated like private land, but I have no issue with never being able to draw the tag. I know the end result is the same, but I just want public lands treated as such for hunting. But it’s an opinion, which I’m entitled to, no matter how dumb it is!

No worries, I don’t feel attacked. I’m truly grateful to be able to hunt in Wyoming, but I absolutely think we should be able to discuss ways to make it better and advocate for changes that improve the experience for both residents and no residents without engendering an aura of entitlement or sport-bitching. I’d love to hunt with you some time. Until I retire off active duty, I’m pretty much a dirty NR everywhere, so finding good hunting grounds and partners takes some effort... have bow, will travel!
 

TheCougar

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
1,512
Location
Fort Worth, TX
“I guess I don't understand why NR seem to be disproportionately disliked in WY... Perhaps NR aren't disliked any more than any other state, but organizations like Mountain Pursuits and hearing stories about flat tires and encounters with angry ranchers sure make it seem like we are persona non grata.”

Ive hunter WY for 10 years and never have had anything but positives.
I believe it. I had a great experience myself this year. But read Buzz’s post. One can easily infer that there is a contingent that seems bent on reducing NR hunting privileges. It may be a vocal minority or a large majority - which I don’t know. Nor do I know the “why”. I’m hoping when Buzz answers, it will shed some light on it.
 

Muley Buck

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,154
Location
California
I didn’t mean to imply that Buzz dislikes nonresidents, so apologies if it came off that way. It just seemed like his posts were contradictory regarding NR, and I wanted to understand the genesis of his issues with apparent fatigue at defending, for lack of a better term, NRs.

When I referred to a large push for “more opportunity”, I was specifically talking about an increase in tags, since that is what Buzz seemed to be talking about in a couple of his previous posts. I know it is nonsensical to feel the way I do about the Wilderness rule - I just hate when public land is treated like private land, but I have no issue with never being able to draw the tag. I know the end result is the same, but I just want public lands treated as such for hunting. But it’s an opinion, which I’m entitled to, no matter how dumb it is!

No worries, I don’t feel attacked. I’m truly grateful to be able to hunt in Wyoming, but I absolutely think we should be able to discuss ways to make it better and advocate for changes that improve the experience for both residents and no residents without engendering an aura of entitlement or sport-bitching. I’d love to hunt with you some time. Until I retire off active duty, I’m pretty much a dirty NR everywhere, so finding good hunting grounds and partners takes some effort... have bow, will travel!
No offense taken here as well. I understand and appreciate your opinions. Guys like you that have your demeanor are what makes Rokslide a good place to discuss highly passionate issues, with out everybody getting their panties in a bunch (usually). Carry on.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
672
Location
Wyoming
I'm having trouble reconciling a couple of your posts... It seems like in one breath you are lamenting NR opportunity in Wyoming, but in other posts you are espousing the value of the wildlife resource in terms of revenue and benefit to the local economy, a large part of which is paid for by NR. I hunted Wyoming this year and had a great time. I picked up leftover antelope doe tags and deer tags and had a good experience. I am thankful that Wyoming gives such great opportunity to NR hunters - and it does for sure. I guess I don't understand why NR seem to be disproportionately disliked in WY... Perhaps NR aren't disliked any more than any other state, but organizations like Mountain Pursuits and hearing stories about flat tires and encounters with angry ranchers sure make it seem like we are persona non grata. Most folks here, myself included, seem to love Wyoming and are happy with the opportunity to hunt there - every year if they so choose, so I guess I don't get why you seem so frustrated with NRs.

I don't recall a large push for "more opportunity" for NRs, specifically as it relates to tag numbers - honestly, I think that WY gives us ample tags and I hope it doesn't decrease. I also understand NR angst about the recent change to the draw applications. I'm glad it was beneficial to wildlife management and the lawful allocation of tags, however I'm pretty sure that most NR are disappointed with the WGFD decision to side with WOGA and keep the application date at 31 Jan. I get that ultimately you don't care about that, since your concern is proper management and tag allocation, and I frankly don't expect anything other than WOGA looking out for themselves at the expense of everything else. It was a good decision that had poor execution, I suppose. I personally find WGFD's wilderness rule to be infuriating. I would honestly rather have the wilderness areas be a LE unit that I could never draw, rather than an area I can get on a general tag but never step foot in without a resident or guide. I don't know why that makes it more bearable - never hunting it because I can't draw the tag rather than an arbitrary rule that says I can't cross an invisible line, but that's my opinion.

I've read enough of your responses to know that this falls into your "yup, you're right, it sucks, good luck changing it" bucket. Fair enough, but we should be able to have these conversations without being labeled as whiny ungrateful NRs. Everybody looks after their own interests, whether it is you, WOGA, WGFD, or NRs... but we sure seem to take some heat for it.

On behalf of all the grateful NR hunters, thanks for protecting our privileges to hunt in WY.
Lets get a couple things straight...just so everything is clear.

1. I agree that NR money is good for the State and good for the Game and Fish and why I typically thank complete strangers in the field for supporting the GF via license purchases. But, even though NR's believe they fund a "majority" of the GF, they're dead wrong. Don't over-play your queen high full house...we still have 4 aces. Residents fund a majority of the over-all budget via PR, WWNRT, Grants, etc. etc. Its also Resident hunters that support the various NGO's that do a lot of on the ground work as well as provide additional funding for all kinds of wildlife specific things here. The list is endless on the number of volunteer hours and money that many Residents spend outside of their license fees. We also attend meetings, meet with legislators, GF, attend commission meetings, etc. etc. that ensure we keep things headed in the right direction. When we were on the cusp of losing access to one of the best HMA's in the State due to vandalism, it was Residents that stepped up immediately to set up a fund to compensate the landowner for the lose. There is a bunch of stuff that goes on like this that NR's don't ever even hear about, where Residents step up for the sake of all hunters and anglers. So, I appreciate the financial support of NR paying a bigger piece of the license fee portion of the budget, but keep in mind, there is a huge piece of the budget that is not associated with license fees.

2. Anyone that would flatten tires or otherwise vandalize ANY vehicle, property, etc. is totally out of line. Angry ranchers? Take a number and get in line...both R and NR's experience that.

3. Mountain Pursuits is free to advocate for anything they want, including putting Resident opportunity first, or even trying to increase Resident opportunity. As a NR, we all hunt at the pleasure of the Resident Sportsmen. I take what they offer, and do so graciously, knowing full well they are not required, in any way shape or form to even allow me to hunt or fish for their wildlife. I pay what they ask, and simply say "thank you". Yet, when it comes to Wyoming that provides an incredible amount of opportunity to NR's, they still want more. They also don't want Residents looking out for themselves. I wont apologize for wanting to keep 90% of the moose, sheep, goat, and bison tags for Wyoming Residents. That seems to be the line that most other states use, AS A MAXIMUM, when allocating their resources. I'd rather see a youth, or long time Resident applicant get one of those tags before a non resident.

4. It also wears me out that NR's think they're the only hunters and fisherman that support local economies. Not only do I support business's year round I also support even more when I hunt and fish. I've stayed in hotels from Cody to Gillette to Buffalo, to Sundance to Rawlins to Evanston and everywhere in between. I buy fuel at all those places, junk food at the gas stations, dinners in the evening...yada yada. Resident hunters travel a ton in Wyoming and they take their bill folds with them.
 

jmez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
4,691
Location
Piedmont, SD
I would think all residents of a state would place their interests before NR's. I don't mind NR hunters in SD, help them as much as I can. When it comes to opportunity though, I place my interest before theirs and I should. I live here, that should afford me some privilege that they don't have.

Non residents are not allowed to hunt elk or mt lions in SD. I don't have a problem with that.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
672
Location
Wyoming
I believe it. I had a great experience myself this year. But read Buzz’s post. One can easily infer that there is a contingent that seems bent on reducing NR hunting privileges. It may be a vocal minority or a large majority - which I don’t know. Nor do I know the “why”. I’m hoping when Buzz answers, it will shed some light on it.
There's a difference between Residents wanting to KEEP their allocation of tags rather than having them scooped up by dropping to the Non Resident draw and actually wanting to REDUCE the NR allocation.

Some Residents want to do both, a majority, IMO/E are more interested in just keeping what they are allotted via statute and regulation.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
672
Location
Wyoming
I would think all residents of a state would place their interests before NR's. I don't mind NR hunters in SD, help them as much as I can. When it comes to opportunity though, I place my interest before theirs and I should. I live here, that should afford me some privilege that they don't have.

Non residents are not allowed to hunt elk or mt lions in SD. I don't have a problem with that.
Agree 100%...
 

Muley Buck

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,154
Location
California
I would think all residents of a state would place their interests before NR's. I don't mind NR hunters in SD, help them as much as I can. When it comes to opportunity though, I place my interest before theirs and I should. I live here, that should afford me some privilege that they don't have.

Non residents are not allowed to hunt elk or mt lions in SD. I don't have a problem with that.
And neither do I.
 

Sammymusi

Junior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
26
This is my first year applying with 3 other friends , we applied with the special draw. Can't wait till may to see if we get in or not.
 

ShortMountain91

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2018
Messages
220
Location
Tennessee
I don't have a ton of points. Maybe 20 across several states but would gladly give up any states points to see a random draw

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

willy

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
27
Location
NE
This article also explains it pretty well.

This is a rather extreme example of nr hunting year after year working pp within the parameters of the pp system. I hope this is very rare.

Can/Does anyone get or have statistics on what the % of nr elk hunters hunt 2 or more years in a row in WY that drew because of having enough points, not because of a random draw thrown in for one of those years.

My experience hunting WY has been incredible. I have met fine people res and nr alike while there. Never an issue. Though I don't hunt pronghorn I have discussed seeing a lot of them and I concur with those who have said the locals regard them as little more than rats and a shoot them all mentality. They didn't need to be goaded into these comments. I'm glad that nr appreciate them for their sake and for the WGFD.

I'm all for residents of their state to want to protect their hunting opps and should have some privileges over nr hunters for same species. I think WY does a great job of managing their big game to keep quality hunting for all. Every resident can hunt elk just not all are going to be able to hunt LQ areas. Its the same way in my state(NE) for deer. Elk are resident only. Bighorn sheep, one tag for a resident and one for whoever pays the most cash at the fundraiser they do for the bighorn sheep. I don't have a problem with that as the bighorn sheep need all the help they can get as they have some issues going on in our state.

This past season I hunted with someone from this forum that was kind enough to share his points with me for a general hunt. It was an incredible experience and couldn't have worked out better. I learned way more from him than he from me but it was as though we had been friends for life. Hopefully it works out that way with those who end up hunting together in the manner we did. If you go this route make sure you're both of the same mindset/passion of the hunt. As it has been posted prior, personal conversations and such should help one realize if the person that your thinking of sharing a hunt is a good fit. A western hunt is such a huge undertaking that having the right person hunting with you can make or break the experience regardless if one punches a tag or not.

My plan is to share a hunt again in 2021 with someone that wants to go in on a general tag app.

I'm going this year just to tag along with some long time friends who have the same passion. One is his first elk hunt (bucket list), the other two have been on a couple elk hunts. They haven't gone for 5 years. For all of them it will probably be their last elk hunt with how the point creep is going.

Perhaps a tweak to the pp system could be a rule of no more than two hunts in a two year period per species. In my opinion point sharing does help get point turnover to happen and allows for friends and family to hunt together.

I have been pming with Buzzh and our discussion inspired me to buck up and share on this thread. I appreciate all the responses on this thread as it hasn't turned into a *&%^ show.
 

jmez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
4,691
Location
Piedmont, SD
You buy the points you own them. Free to do with them what you wish within the confines of the laws.
 

ndbuck09

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
412
Location
Boise, ID
Since the discussion is on Non-Residents in Wyoming, I have an honest question that I'm not sure how it works as a younger guy who wasn't necessarily around so much when it was put in place.

How can a state like Wyoming limit Non-Residents from accessing and hunting on federally managed public land Wilderness that is supposed to provide an untrammeled recreation experience for all of the people that collectively comprise the United States? How can a state single out one user group and say that a single activity is not allowed on land that that state doesn't even administer? It just doesn't seem like that would pass any sort of legal ramifications and I'm genuinely curious how this can stay in place?
 

Muley Buck

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
1,154
Location
California
Because the state is the controlling entity of big game. The federal government is not. You can go out in the federal wilderness in Wyoming just like anywhere else. You just can't shoot/hunt the states big game there. As I understand it, the hunting of big game animals is not regulated federally.
 

BuzzH

Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2017
Messages
672
Location
Wyoming
Since the discussion is on Non-Residents in Wyoming, I have an honest question that I'm not sure how it works as a younger guy who wasn't necessarily around so much when it was put in place.

How can a state like Wyoming limit Non-Residents from accessing and hunting on federally managed public land Wilderness that is supposed to provide an untrammeled recreation experience for all of the people that collectively comprise the United States? How can a state single out one user group and say that a single activity is not allowed on land that that state doesn't even administer? It just doesn't seem like that would pass any sort of legal ramifications and I'm genuinely curious how this can stay in place?
Quick and dirty is that Land Ownership is not tied to wildlife and the States have the right, via case law and s. 339 to discriminate against NR's any way they want. Your access to Federal Land is not taken away, only limits your use of a State owned asset. For the record, I totally disagree with the law, but that means about nothing in regard to the legal aspect of what Wyoming does.

Start here:


Then refer to S. 339 Reaffirming the authority of States Regulate hunting and fishing activities

A BILL
To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and fishing activities.

  • Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
  • This Act may be cited as the `Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005'.


SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE.
  • (a) In General- It is the policy of Congress that it is in the public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries, including by means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting or fishing.
    (b) Construction of Congressional Silence- Silence on the part of Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier under clause 3 of Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the `commerce clause') to the regulation of hunting or fishing by a State or Indian tribe.


SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.
  • Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
    • (1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife or to the regulation of commerce;
      (2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the United States; or
      (3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.


SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.
  • For purposes of this Act, the term `State' includes the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
 

idahohikker

Senior Member
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,755
Location
ID
Since the discussion is on Non-Residents in Wyoming, I have an honest question that I'm not sure how it works as a younger guy who wasn't necessarily around so much when it was put in place.

How can a state like Wyoming limit Non-Residents from accessing and hunting on federally managed public land Wilderness that is supposed to provide an untrammeled recreation experience for all of the people that collectively comprise the United States? How can a state single out one user group and say that a single activity is not allowed on land that that state doesn't even administer? It just doesn't seem like that would pass any sort of legal ramifications and I'm genuinely curious how this can stay in place?
There’s basically no legal challenge available here. At best it’s a long shot at changing established precedent. States can discriminate against nonresidents regarding wildlife management.
 
Top