Penalty for hunting in wilderness as a non resedent?
- Thread starter kstitz
- Start date
Againstthewind
Very Active Member
PlainsHunter
Active Member
Guys,
I did not ask about the outfitters associations proposed penalty, we all know any of the responses could apply. I ask what the actual penalty from DOW would be?
I asked a warden why they have such a law and he said the outfitters association's lobyist got it pushed through the state legislature. If I was a wealthy man or an attorney I would definetly challenge this law. But you would have to take it to federal court because there is not a judge in WY that would over turn it.
I did not ask about the outfitters associations proposed penalty, we all know any of the responses could apply. I ask what the actual penalty from DOW would be?
I asked a warden why they have such a law and he said the outfitters association's lobyist got it pushed through the state legislature. If I was a wealthy man or an attorney I would definetly challenge this law. But you would have to take it to federal court because there is not a judge in WY that would over turn it.
Againstthewind
Very Active Member
http://legisweb.state.wy.us/statutes/titles/Title23/T23CH2AR4.htm
Its a misdemeanor with up to a $5000 fine according to this.
Its a misdemeanor with up to a $5000 fine according to this.
mntnguide
Very Active Member
This law has been around a LONG time...its nothing new.
The fines talked about above would be through the game and fish and State...an outfitter association cant write a ticket....This is an issue that every NR hates and thats fine and understandable. . Now from my personal thoughts, I have guided in the Teton wilderness for 5 years and the outfitter i worked for has operated out of the same camp for over 75 years. . If this law was gone, the wilderness areas of WY would go to full limited quota in a matter of a couple years. . The amount of resident hunters we see during the first couple weeks of rifle is astounding, and if every NR that wanted to hunt there could, I assure you it would go LQ and the #'s of animals would drop immediately.
I understand everyone's feeling of wanting to hunt the "famed" wilderness areas of WY especially the ones surrounding the park; and as someone who is most likely about to become a NR as I change careers...I personally still hope this law stays because the wilderness areas would be ruined for hunting by the amount of people who would flock here. For those that have never been up there, im sure you will disagree with me, and thats fine, thats why this is a forum.
The fines talked about above would be through the game and fish and State...an outfitter association cant write a ticket....This is an issue that every NR hates and thats fine and understandable. . Now from my personal thoughts, I have guided in the Teton wilderness for 5 years and the outfitter i worked for has operated out of the same camp for over 75 years. . If this law was gone, the wilderness areas of WY would go to full limited quota in a matter of a couple years. . The amount of resident hunters we see during the first couple weeks of rifle is astounding, and if every NR that wanted to hunt there could, I assure you it would go LQ and the #'s of animals would drop immediately.
I understand everyone's feeling of wanting to hunt the "famed" wilderness areas of WY especially the ones surrounding the park; and as someone who is most likely about to become a NR as I change careers...I personally still hope this law stays because the wilderness areas would be ruined for hunting by the amount of people who would flock here. For those that have never been up there, im sure you will disagree with me, and thats fine, thats why this is a forum.
Shooter
Active Member
Biggest load of crap I have ever read. You have drank the WY cool aid. Wilderness area's are some of the least hunted places there are. The first few years I am sure you would see more NR hunters but it would balance back out after a few years. Wilderness area's present way to many challenges to the average hunter.
ore hunter
Very Active Member
- Jul 25, 2014
- 699
- 114
the wyoming outfitters paid off some folks to push this thru i suspect,,,no other states have this non-resident law on "our national forest"thats right folks national public land,,of the united states,,,not wyoming.
Bonecollector
Veteran member
shootbrownelk
Veteran member
The Outfitters/Ranchers/Legislators in Wyoming are all in bed together, from what I've observed over the years. The outfitters/ranchers are a powerful lobby in Wyoming. What they say goes. There are an overwhelming number of ranchers that are legislators and they pass laws that are good for them. Heck, the Governor is a rancher.
In 2013 I hunted with a resident in the wilderness, I saw all of 1 hunter in the wilderness in 5 days of huinting. When we were going in to set up our camp we saw 2 locals on an atv that said they had not seen an elk in over 2 weeks. We saw elfk the very next morning about 1 mile into the wilderness. Like wise the guys that I was hunting with have hunted this unit for 4 years nand have never seen another hunter. There is an outfitter in the area who thinks he owns the wilderness. Funny I killed a nicer bull than any of there hunter that they had in camp that week.
The general season is still a draw season so it is still a limited entry and they sell out of all the non resident tags so I disagree that the it will cause overcrowding in the wilderness. It is not like Colorado where they have unlimited bull tags.
I have worked in WY for the past 2 years and I love the state, but I can tell you it is a good old boys club & if you are not from there you are not part of it. As I stated previosly a warden told me last year that the outfitters association hired lobyist that got the law passed.
I have a real problem when a state can dictate to me that I can not hunt on federal lands that my tax dollars go towards managing. Especially when I pay $1100 for a tag and a resedent pays about $40.
The reason that I ask the question is that if it was just a fine and not a possible loss of license I would definitly take the chance.
I believe this law is unconstitutional and discriminitory and I have a real problem with people stepping on my rights. I would be willing to start a fund and hire an attorney to challenge this law in court if we can get enough interest to do so. I would think there would be a fellow hunter/attorney that feels the same as I do about this law.
The general season is still a draw season so it is still a limited entry and they sell out of all the non resident tags so I disagree that the it will cause overcrowding in the wilderness. It is not like Colorado where they have unlimited bull tags.
I have worked in WY for the past 2 years and I love the state, but I can tell you it is a good old boys club & if you are not from there you are not part of it. As I stated previosly a warden told me last year that the outfitters association hired lobyist that got the law passed.
I have a real problem when a state can dictate to me that I can not hunt on federal lands that my tax dollars go towards managing. Especially when I pay $1100 for a tag and a resedent pays about $40.
The reason that I ask the question is that if it was just a fine and not a possible loss of license I would definitly take the chance.
I believe this law is unconstitutional and discriminitory and I have a real problem with people stepping on my rights. I would be willing to start a fund and hire an attorney to challenge this law in court if we can get enough interest to do so. I would think there would be a fellow hunter/attorney that feels the same as I do about this law.
jjenness
Very Active Member
At this point I wouldn't consider myself for, or against, this law. But I would ask, what is the justification for not allowing NR to hunt the wilderness areas alone? I can hunt the wilderness of MT just fine, so what would preclude me from doing the same in WY safely? If there is a common sense, valid argument I would be interested in hearing it. PS, I am not trying to stoke the fire here I just think it is an interesting topic, and no I have never hunted WY.
You can hunt small game, fish, hike, trail ride and camp in the wilderness. But you can not hunt big game! They do not have to justify it beacause from the legislature to the ranchers and outfitters, they have the power to implement what ever law they see fit.
Hilltop
Veteran member
Good debate on both sides of the coin. At times I hate this law but at other times in my past I loved it so I can see both sides of the fence. As a former Wyoming resident and guide I understood the resident and outfitter point of view. Now that I am a non-resident it frustrates me that I am not allowed to hunt areas that I was licensed to guide on in past years. Mountain guide does have a valid point that this would increase hunter numbers in the wilderness. I agree that few residents hunt the wilderness as the vast majority are passive, weekend hunters. Non-resident hunters are different in that they typically will take a serious week long hunting trip. They put all their eggs in one basket so as a group I believe they will hunt a bit harder as a whole during that time landing a good number of them in wilderness. I think you would also see many more un-guided drop camps being offered by outfitters as this is an easier hunt for them to book and manage.
One thing is for sure- neither side of the fence is going to be settled here but it is fun to hear the different points of view.
One thing is for sure- neither side of the fence is going to be settled here but it is fun to hear the different points of view.
Againstthewind
Very Active Member
(2) nonresident hunters. The commission may also specify other areas of the state, or specific big or trophy game species, for which a licensed professional or resident guide is required for nonresidents, for purposes of proper game management, protection of hunter welfare and safety, or better enforcement of game and fish laws.
This is the only justification I saw in the bill. I am just trying to give some sort of guess at it. I am not sure why you can do everything but hunt big game either. I guess they figured a resident would be more likely to know the ins and outs of Wyoming hunting regulations and follow them as opposed to a non-resident. The wilderness areas are much harder to patrol for the game and fish and they are kindof needed elsewhere, so I am reading this as they were using the residents to make sure the "guests" followed all the rules in the wilderness area and stayed safe. Maybe its just a cop out the lobbyist came up with, I don't know, but that is my best guess.
I do agree with Hilltop on resident hunting styles and that sort of thing. I also agree that I do kindof like the law because it does limit the number of hunters further than hunting quotas which helps to protect the wilderness. Even "leave no trace" drop camps leave a footprint.
This is the only justification I saw in the bill. I am just trying to give some sort of guess at it. I am not sure why you can do everything but hunt big game either. I guess they figured a resident would be more likely to know the ins and outs of Wyoming hunting regulations and follow them as opposed to a non-resident. The wilderness areas are much harder to patrol for the game and fish and they are kindof needed elsewhere, so I am reading this as they were using the residents to make sure the "guests" followed all the rules in the wilderness area and stayed safe. Maybe its just a cop out the lobbyist came up with, I don't know, but that is my best guess.
I do agree with Hilltop on resident hunting styles and that sort of thing. I also agree that I do kindof like the law because it does limit the number of hunters further than hunting quotas which helps to protect the wilderness. Even "leave no trace" drop camps leave a footprint.
Funny how things change your attitude when it directly effects you. Not criticizing you personally it is just human nature.
I bet if all states implemented this same law it would get challenged in federal court very quickly. Likewise if they implemented the same law on the residents it would likely cause an upraor.
It is a clear case of discrimination in my eyes. Federal lands should have the same access rules for all!
I guess if I take my fishing rod with me when I am hunting and claim that I am fishing and have my rifle for protection. Or Icould say that I am horseback riding.
I will bet if they had a total restriction on the use of wilderness areas like they have for big game hunters it would also nbe overturned federally.
I will bet if they had a total restriction on the use of wilderness areas like they have for big game hunters it would also nbe overturned federally.