Wyoming all you can kill

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,211
Likes
4,255
Points
883
Location
Cavalier, ND
https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/proposed-unlimited-elk-permits-for-wyoming-ranchers/
Don't you just love articles about wildlife management that only benefits very few, I'm totally being sarcastic by the way.
Allemand’s proposal would certainly help tamp down on elk numbers. It’s also been criticized by many hunters in the state. They say it would give preferential treatment to landowners—some of whom have helped create the very problem this proposal claims it would solve. These hunters point out that there are plenty of people who would love the opportunity to hunt elk on private land, but that many landowners have chosen instead to charge exorbitant trespass fees or work exclusively with outfitters
Doesn't this remind you of a particular man in north dakota who has some the biggest parcels of land in western part of the state.
 


wslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2015
Posts
2,668
Likes
739
Points
373
"These hunters point out that there are plenty of people who would love the opportunity to hunt elk on private land, but that many landowners have chosen instead to charge exorbitant trespass fees or work exclusively with outfitters."

Right here is the key element , sounds like some legislators are in someone's back pocket.
 

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,211
Likes
4,255
Points
883
Location
Cavalier, ND
Absolutely nothing chaps my hide more then some playing victim to get special treatment when they were the ones who caused the problem. Not all land owners are like this though perhaps this may be like you said a landowners who donated to a special interest group who allows this landowners to double dip in receiving private and tax payers money.
I know this is different and that it is because it is north dakota but we have the opposite here where we have willing landowners who would like the gnf to g8ve out more tags
 

YCbtx

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2023
Posts
30
Likes
91
Points
40
Agreed, terrible plan that wreaks of landowners being in bed with politicians.. As a landowner, if you purchase a $20 tag, your land should have to go on a list similar to the BMA program in MT to allow hunters to sign up for dates to access your land to harvest a cow elk. If you have such a problem, general tax paying public should be able to help you solve it.
 

SupressYourself

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
2,060
Likes
563
Points
388
Location
Not where I'd like to be
"Allemand initially suggested that ranchers would be able to sell their unlimited take permits if they wanted to, but WGFD chief game warden Rick King nipped this idea in the bud, according to CSD. King argued that this would only incentivize landowners to keep elk populations high and create an even bigger market for high-dollar hunts. Allemand then agreed to change the language in his proposal to allow landowners to give these permits away but not sell them."

Yeah... like there wouldn't be any under the table deals with the outfitters that they "give" these permits to...
 


bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
658
Likes
496
Points
240
If you listen to a certain AM 550 radio host, this is exactly the type of thing him and his bureau of farmers are pushing for here. And every year they get closer.

Step 1: Insist until you are blue in the face that you are pro-hunting and pro-2A for street cred

Step 2: Limit land access through official ways (e-posting, legislation) and non-official ways (incite property rights hysteria, ND lockout)

Step 3: Discredit G&F at every chance, blame them for everything on radio and social media and eventually people begin to believe it. Frustrated hunters buy in and start doing their bidding.

Step 4: With enough support from landowners, hunters, and now legislators, pass bills that do exactly this. Landowners now control access to land and tags; essentially owning the game as well. But only those with X many thousand acres. As they should right? It’s their land and livelihood. It’s only a hobby to you. You thought the good old days of access, habitat, and game populations were gone now, you haven’t seen anything. What habitat and game is left will be sold to the highest bidder.

“It’s a big club, and YOU ain’t in it”- George Carlin
 

Retired Educator

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
3,252
Likes
224
Points
283
Location
North Dakota
I frequently change stations as I get so tired to Daryl Lies and his ranting all listed above. Sometimes I wait until I hear a comment about private property rights. 3 minutes is the quickest I've changed the station.
I have no problem with landowner rights, but that does not translate to them owning the wildlife. I can live with posting private land, I wonder what would have happened if a bill had been introduced that all private land in ND is posted, l ike many states, but anyone receiving government assistance will forfeit the right to chage for using the wildlife. I'm pretty sure I would not be in favor of such a law but would like to see Daryl's opinion.
By the way I'm a landowner who posts a small portion of my property. Don't want many people walking through the farmyard.
 

Walleye Slayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 13, 2015
Posts
31
Likes
25
Points
118
Location
Pierre, SD
Politics and money WILL ruin hunting for the average non-land-owning person.
It already has in South Dakota.

All of the arguments you are having above are already happening here and more, every year it gets worse. I'm just about ready to say screw hunting and just go fishing all the time.
 

espringers

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
8,337
Likes
1,157
Points
488
Location
Devils Lake
Hell... south Dakota is/was even trying to ruin fishing to a degree a while back. Didn't they pass some sort of trespass on water law or some shit?
 

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,913
Likes
2,099
Points
758
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
At a minimum, the proposal needs to be changed to read something along the lines of "a landowner can in no way, shape, or form receive compensation for someone hunting an elk". If the rules force me to give away a tag to anyone for free, one stipulation I have is that you will have to pay $600/night of lodging in my spare bedroom with a minimum charge of 10 nights. Whether, or not, you actually sleep there is not my problem.
 


lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
20,211
Likes
4,255
Points
883
Location
Cavalier, ND
At a minimum, the proposal needs to be changed to read something along the lines of "a landowner can in no way, shape, or form receive compensation for someone hunting an elk". If the rules force me to give away a tag to anyone for free, one stipulation I have is that you will have to pay $600/night of lodging in my spare bedroom with a minimum charge of 10 nights. Whether, or not, you actually sleep there is not my problem.
That would be dirt cheap Allen, you would have no problem getting people to pay that price. Especially when some landowners charge 10 to 15000 depending on the sex of your tag to hunt on their land.
 

Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
18,862
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Mobridge,Sd
Politics and money WILL ruin hunting for the average non-land-owning person.
It already has in South Dakota.

All of the arguments you are having above are already happening here and more, every year it gets worse. I'm just about ready to say screw hunting and just go fishing all the time.
How so. I always here how it’s ruined here but have yet to be told no this year.
 

Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
18,862
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Mobridge,Sd
Hell... south Dakota is/was even trying to ruin fishing to a degree a while back. Didn't they pass some sort of trespass on water law or some shit?
Non meandered water. It’s really not that big deal. If you can’t find some where to fish you should probably quit.
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
658
Likes
496
Points
240
I’m not well versed in SD’s posted water issues. South Dakota’s walk in program is pretty good. The pheasant access program around Aberdeen I saw on a recent episode of Meateater was interesting. Basically the area folks saw that access, habitat, birds, and in turn hunters and their dollars were dwindling. Businesses, farmers & ranchers, and the city banded together and have turned it around. May not work everywhere, but it has down there.
 


wslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2015
Posts
2,668
Likes
739
Points
373
@Walleye Slayer , not that its totally a bad thing for "big" game, but according to your avatar, it kinda leans towards the pay to hunt format.
Just an observation. . .
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
658
Likes
496
Points
240
Thought you might chime in Dwight. You’re kind of like beetlejuice, say the words farm, bureau, and elk and appear. What are your thoughts on the article? I think “Give out a million tags. You’re still not going to knock down the elk herd because there’s no way for hunters to get in there and be effective” pretty much says it all. If you’re denying access and complaining about elk destruction I don’t know the solution.
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,141
Likes
758
Points
463
bravo, If I could pass you a towel I would so you have something to cry into.

Last winter thousands upon thousands of deer and elk died in Wyoming from starvation. Maybe Game and Fish should try feeding them on public ground and or building thermal cover and food plots on public ground.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 547
  • This month: 248
  • This month: 190
  • This month: 178
  • This month: 144
  • This month: 107
  • This month: 104
  • This month: 94
  • This month: 91
  • This month: 81
Top Bottom