You mean not drawing no hunting in BB National park.

But in the State park, All Res and NR not only have same allocation % requirement but all have the same application costs

I apologize, but I have no idea what you believe I'm "projecting", please explain, it should be entertaining. I'm not complaining about anything.

My point is WY has the right to manage its wildlife game as it sees fit, just like every state. If you don't like it, don't hunt there. I don't know what is "projecting" about that but....

This argument is certainly entertaining.
txtrophy I'm curious as to how your tax dollars manage wildlife on federal lands, states manage wildlife within their boundaries except for NPs and refuges .
With a population of about 306 million folks in the USA paying taxes that manage 648 million acres of federal land, how do you know your tax dollars are not paying for land management in say Arizona, not Wyoming ?

Had to stir a little bit,


BOBO WG&F has done studies on the loss of revenue and how to offset it. Not going to be huge impact on our resident fees.
NRs will still apply for an buy all of our NR licenses available even if it goes 90/10. I just don't see a big decrease in apps coming. The hunting is just too good for some to let it go.
I don't see our NR licenses going up exorbitantly either, hopefully. No need to price out the average guy .
Our donated licenses raise big money , no doubt, and will continue to in the future. Some have decent odds of winning a license, the raffles.

Blah. Blah. Blah.

The highest court in the land has ruled that the individual states are responsible for the wildlife within the borders of those states. The only exception is migrating birds which the Feds do regulate. No amount of crying on your part will change it. Deal with it.

How much out of state hunting do you do sir?

Does that change anything? Nope.

I've hunted on Federal Land in Nebraska, Idaho, and New Mexico. Didn't change the fact I was a non-resident and privileged to even have a chance to hunt their game animals.

I’m sorry are you his counsel?

I'm sorry, I'm not his "counsel" and let the record show, your honor, I never insinuated or implied I was.......


Your honor, how much out of state hunting do you do?

I know it won’t effect much now, the current 90/10 rules is only 20’ish tag if that. That’s an easy pick up in app and PP fees etc.

Now you start doing that with Deer, ElK and pronghorn, and the shift starts to put more pressure back on residences.

My exponential increase in residents statement was if hunter307 got his way and cut all NR. Although he may be able to justify the extra cost not all residents can. Just like not all hunters can afford the NR application game

The NR fees are starting to add up and with states requiring hunting license purchase for all applications to maximize on Pittman Robertson allocation. I have a couple friends that are strictly down to CO or Idaho OTC just do to other application costs and draw odds.

What? That’s not managing wildlife. That’s managing license plates. Same number of tags is still being issued. Tag numbers in reference to success % is managing wild life.

Pretty dense to come on an out of state forum and start telling guys that they are entitled even though NR are in fact subsidizing a large part of there hunting cost.

I don’t agree W/TTrophy’s rebuttal or ideology., I simply think it’s chicken [censored] to tell NR they have no voice when in fact you have no issue taking their money to subsidize residents costs

Since you asked, i have held licenses in 13 states. And that has ZERO to with anything because of the ruling by the courts. Grow up Child

1. You still have not explained what I'm "projecting"

2. OK if allocation of tags doesn't fall under "wildlife management", how about...... Wyoming, like any state, reserves the right to allocate hunting tags on game animals they are responsible for managing however they see fit. Is more accurate?

3. I stated "I don't feel entitled to other states game animals" because i am not. If you don't want to "subsidize a large part of hunting costs", don't. It's voluntary after all.

4. It's not "chicken schiet", it's the truth. For the record, as I've stated multiple times , I believe residents should be paying more for tags. If nothing more to lesson the amount of NR whiners complaining and virtue signaling about how much they WILLINGLY foot the bill....


Look at Montana. A resident pays $7.50 (yes that's correct less than 8 bucks) for a year long upland game bird license. The same license costs NR $110.00. The first year I lived in WY I had to pay $80.00 for an upland license because I hadn't met the 365 day requirement.

It is what it is.....

Any now we resort to name calling.....who is the child?

It’s one big circle with you and I.. you are projecting at NR for wanting a say when their money is used to capture Pittman Robertson funds and subsidize costs, for your own opportunity. That’s our fundemental difference

I’m not looking at my self in the equation like you are. I buy LO vouchers all the time in different states. I’m not going to be priced out. I bid on auction tags. I get LO tags for pronghorn every year in a state everyone else is once in a lifetime draw.

With that said, I know several people whom can no longer afford many of the state application processes for such a minimal chance to draw or success rates. You are right don’t apply and don’t hunt, per your posts that would tickle the hell out of you.

All this doesnt matter anyway, It’s not going to change and the trend will continue to be less NR opportunity in favor for auction tags. Eventually NR opportunity won’t exist outside of auction tags, at that point, hunting is lost because a large share of Res will be priced out, then you have massive generational loss of voting power, and end up like Cali , Washington and OR, with CO not far off. NV is barely holding on because of LO tag program, it won’t be long there either.

Enjoy it now because you aren’t leaving much of a legacy for your grandkids.

That’s where I stand. This subject has nothing to do with me or my hunting, like it does for you. For me It has to do with generational loss of hunting opportunity across the country that leads to different voting mindset.

But isn't it a form of socialism you are advocating? Where everyone shares in the dividing of something.

On public land held in public trust paid for by the public… yes… it’s a rare case of it working. We are almost at a 100 years of history with it. Unfortunately it’s looking destined to fail, federal land we’ll be lost to state, state charters will mandate a sell and those of us with large holdings will be able to buy and grow our generational wealth via the backs of the lower income middle class.

Texas management model works well for non migratory animals. What happens when a sheep rancher buys all the high altitude land and all the big horns get Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae? Or joe blow farmer has a large chunk of winter range and decides he is tired of the elk and gets depreciation permits

Federal land manages for sustainability of the natural resources, as a farmer and rancher I can tell you I absolutely don’t manage for the sustainability of wildlife. They are a nuisance

"projection, the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds."

I am not "projecting" anything.

I don't like auction tags. I think residents should carry a higher financial burden to fund our G&F. I believe 90/10 allocation is reasonable. I believe the state reserves the right to allocate tags as they see fit. NR hunting is a privilege.

I don't know how those are controversial beliefs.

Actually in this instance it is less of "name calling" than it is a descriptive term. You are the only one crying, whining and pouting so the descriptive term is actually quite apt considering how you are acting. However, I will publicly apologize if I hurt your feelings, Little Boy. The cold hard fact of the matter is that the individual states have been granted the authority and the responsibility for managing the wildlife within the boundaries of their respective states. No amount of temper tantrums on your part is going to change it so you may as well accept it.

I will also offer the observation that you are indeed fortunate that demonstrations of a lack of intelligence are not painful. For if they were you would find yourself in agony at the emergency room begging for morphine. With that I bid you a good day and will respond to you no further. Life is too short to banter with the imbecilic.

Oh man, you ruined my Saturday night!

I better start looking for that morphine drip…

Ignore him. As Cousin Eddie told Clark, "He's got a little Mississippi Leg Hound in him, if he gets up on ya', it's best to just let him finish".

Funny post for sure, it is you who needs to PYHO. The states wildlife does not belong to the citizens of Wyoming, if it did you wouldn't need to buy a license would you? And if it did where is your cut from the non resident license sales?

So in your mind hunting is a privilege? Fine I hope you are priced out of it by license fees. It is odd that you are too dense to see that federal land is different than state owned land and private land.

You appear braindead, oblivious to the obvious and a liar. Do you have a link to the "highest court in the land" rulings? And how much state managemant happens on federal lands? And management is not the same as selling tags.

Txtrophy85, my heart is with you but my mind accepted the fact that the states control the animals for its residents...about 20 years ago. Using your logic....if I'm paying twice the federal taxes as you are, shouldn't I have twice the odds of drawing as you? What if ole Ted Turner was hunting the same national forest as you and I ? Hell, he should have the right to tell us to go find another forest....based on our tax returns....hey, speaking of them returns....what if you didn't file one year, or I owed back taxes......

Lots of angles here Bub