A little more than a year ago, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department arranged the slaughter of 129 cow elk on a ranch in southeastern Wyoming. The rancher, with backing from influential political interests, had pressured the department to bring in professional shooters because, he said, the elk were eating grass his cattle needed to get through the winter.
Opinion
It was another installment in the long-running confrontation between a few private landholders and the biologists charged with the management of Wyoming’s big game — arguably one of the most valuable natural resources in the state. The situation led to the introduction of a bill in the last session of the Legislature that would have guaranteed payment to “any landowner, lessee, or agent … for loss of forage … to any big game species on private land.”
In Wyoming, hunters already pay landholders for any hay elk eat out of a haystack, any fences they damage and even “extraordinary damage to grass.” This bill would have gone further, paying ranchers whenever elk ate more than 15% of available forage. One version would have paid 150% of the estimated value of that grass. In order to qualify for the damage payment, the bill would have required ranchers to allow “reasonable hunting” on their property. The bill didn’t offer a definition of “reasonable,” but past experience with similar provisions suggests that it would fall far short of serious public access and wouldn’t disperse a herd of elk for more than a few days, if that.
The bill didn’t pass — this time — but in the aftermath of the legislative debate, Jim Magagna, executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, took the Game and Fish Department to task for not being “more aggressive” in its efforts to keep elk and other big game off privately owned rangeland. Magagna expressed his approval of the elk slaughter and thought Game and Fish should issue up to 20 permits to landholders that would allow them, or anyone they choose, to kill elk on their properties.
It all sounds so sensible. The downtrodden rancher struggling with an elk herd state officials refuse to control. Who couldn’t sympathize?
Well, I can’t, and I suspect I speak for the vast majority of hunters and other citizens of the state who value our wild heritage. As is so often the case in such matters, the devil is in the details.
First, it’s important to recognize that the only cost-effective way to control elk numbers is to kill some of the females that would otherwise bear calves. Selling licenses that allow hunters to do the job actually raises money for wildlife conservation, but, in order for hunters to kill elk, said hunters have to get within a couple hundred yards of their quarry. And that’s where the problem starts. Many of Wyoming’s elk spend much of the fall and all winter behind locked gates, far out of reach of the most motivated hunter.
The Game and Fish Department has bent over backward trying to unlock those gates. Its AccessYes program pays landholders to allow public hunting, tailoring different kinds of access to fit the tastes of landholders. A rancher or farmer who is willing to allow anybody to hunt can sign up for the walk-in program — the department posts the property and includes it in an atlas of available access areas. If landholders only want to allow limited access, they can enroll their land in the hunter management program — the department issues a limited number of access permits, posts the property, includes it in the access atlas, and keeps an eye on the place to make sure no unauthorized hunters trespass. If landholders prefer to deal with potential hunters by themselves, they can sign up for the Hunter/Landowner Assistance Program — the department advertises the landholders’ contact information so that hunters can get in touch.
Last year, landholders were paid $979,000 for their participation in these programs. They’re strictly voluntary, and ranchers are free to opt out if they prefer. But when those same ranchers complain they have too many elk on their pastures, it’s hard for the average hunter to have much sympathy.
What many of these landholders seem to prefer is getting big game permits they can distribute on their own, giving them the power to issue the licenses outside the official application procedure. Magagna points out that state law already allows the Game and Fish Department to issue up to 20 licenses to landholders who say they have problems with elk. These licenses can be given to anyone the ranchers choose. Magagna says landholders can give them to “friends and family” but “they can’t make money off of them.”
That may be what the regulation says — like many other observers, I’m deeply skeptical that it would ever be enforced. If landholders don’t sell the license itself, they can still charge an “access fee,” and, if they or a business partner happen to be an outfitter, they can make even more money by selling guiding services as part of a package that circumvents the state’s random drawings for big game permits. And, even if they sell the license outright in violation of the law, I can’t imagine how the state could catch the transaction or prosecute.
The other alternative some ranchers favor is having professional shooters slaughter some or all the offending elk. That’s what Game and Fish arranged in 2023 for the rancher in southeastern Wyoming. The shooters are under strict control; the killing is efficient, and the processed meat can be donated to a worthy cause. Almost like a domestic livestock operation. Who could complain?
I, for one.
From a strictly practical point of view, I decry the substantial loss of income to the state’s conservation coffers. A nonresident bull elk tag currently costs $692. It’s worth noting that shooting bull elk does nothing whatsoever to control an elk population, but if ranchers have carte blanche with the tags Game and Fish gives them, they stand to make a lot more money selling trophy bulls than cows, perhaps even enough to assuage the anguish of losing all that grass. A nonresident cow-calf tag runs $288. A resident bull tag sells for $57. A resident cow-calf tag goes for $43 or less, depending on the type.
Giving free licenses to landholders would put a significant dent in Game and Fish Department revenue. Twenty licenses sold to nonresidents looking for trophies amounts to nearly $14,000; even if the licenses went to resident cow hunters, the street value is nearly a grand, all of which is lost if the permits are given to landholders. The 129 elk shot by the professionals last winter would have brought more than $7,000 if the department had sold the permits to residents, far more if they had gone to out-of-staters.
That’s the dollars-and-cents argument against giving landholders free elk licenses, but, as unsettling as these numbers are, I find the objections based on law and tradition more persuasive.
For centuries, the rulers of medieval Europe laid sole claim to the game in their domains. Until 1299, a common Englishman could be executed for killing one of the “king’s deer” or have his hand or bow fingers cut off; for centuries after that, he might face a year in prison or banishment from the realm. That rankled the common folk. Hence, the legend of Robin Hood, the young commoner who was condemned as an outlaw for shooting one of the royal stags. The roots of that story reach back into the 13th century, an expression of the simmering resentment the yeomen of the time cherished against the nobility’s claim on the country’s game.
And, according to the 18th-century English barrister William Blackstone, feudal monarchs had other reasons for depriving the yeomanry of the right to hunt:
“All forest and game laws were introduced into Europe at the same time,” Blackstone wrote in 1765, “and by the same policy as gave birth to the feudal system. When a conquering general came to settle a vanquished country, it behooved him to keep the natives in as low a condition as possible, and especially to prohibit them the use of arms. Nothing could do this more effectually than a prohibition of hunting and sporting; and therefore it was the policy of the conqueror to reserve this right to himself, and such on whom he should bestow it; which were only his capital feudatories, or greater barons.”
When the first English settlers made their way to the American wilderness, they discovered a pantheon of liberties they had hardly dreamt of in the Old World — the freedom to hunt was one they particularly cherished and, with it, the right to bear arms.
In the United States, landowners do not own the wildlife that may spend time on their property. The Supreme Court enshrined this concept in American law nearly 200 years ago, stating that game was held by “the people of each state … for the benefit and advantage of the whole community.”
There are still landholders in Wyoming who see the game on their property in this light. I tip my hat to them and pledge to do whatever I can to help with the burden they bear for the well-being of the public’s wildlife.
As for the landholders who deny public access to the public’s game, I’m still more than willing to look for ways to ease the impact of elk and other wildlife on their livelihood. But they should understand that this is a discussion among neighbors, not a decision they can dictate unilaterally. The farming/ranching community in Wyoming accounts for 3% of the jobs in the state and a little more than 1% of the state’s domestic product. There are other, larger interests involved in our game management. Last year, nearly 58,000 people hunted elk in Wyoming, and the number who applied for licenses but didn’t draw is significantly higher.
The fact is that the urban majority has done much to support their rural neighbors, in the matter of big game management and many other sectors of farm life, including funding for the roads, power lines, cell towers and internet that are an irreplaceable part of life in Wyoming, in the country or in town. In return, I don’t think urban hunters are expecting too much when they ask for access to herds of elk, especially when those herds are troubling private landholders.
There are programs in place that offer help to any rancher who is wintering large numbers of elk, nearly all of which are currently funded by hunters. I support those programs, and I think they should be expanded, preferably with money from the state’s general fund. These subsidies should emphasize the general public’s access to the public’s game on private land. The tools exist to deal with elk numbers on private property, if landholders are willing to use them. Contrary to what Magagna and his supporters may think, the Game and Fish Department has been extremely aggressive in its effort to deal with this issue, but there’s a limit to what can be done without cooperation from affected landholders.
I can’t support giving individual landholders the power to issue hunting licenses. Ranchers already control who can and cannot hunt on their property. They must not be given the authority to decide who is licensed to hunt. That power is reserved to the people through the Game and Fish Department. It is administered fairly, without prejudice, and available to anyone who cares to participate. That can’t be allowed to change. Equality in the hunt has been a cornerstone of American tradition and law since the Pilgrims came ashore at Plymouth Rock. It’s a concept many of us cherish as much as the guarantees in the Bill of Rights.
And I can’t condone the slaughter of game animals by hired guns, except where there is no other safe technique for controlling a game population that threatens human life or property. Wildlife in Wyoming, and across the United States, is a public trust. It should be managed in the public interest, not in the interest of a single property owner. In the case of increasing numbers of elk, a perfectly workable solution is available, if the landowner is willing to apply it — it’s hard to believe those elk would have stayed on that ranch in southeastern Wyoming if it had been opened to public hunting, with more than 100,000 city dwellers living within a 50-mile radius.
As a modern “yeoman,” a common man who still cherishes the long-standing tradition of democracy in American hunting, I’d have thought the “Freedom Caucus” and Libertarians of the Wyoming Legislature would stand up for me. Instead, recent news coverage advises me that they’re standing with a tiny minority of the Wyoming public that claims title to most of the land in the state. Owning the land does not mean they own the wildlife.
I understand that many ranchers are less than enthusiastic about allowing public access, although I suspect the horror stories that have made the rounds over the decades are often exaggerated by people who simply prefer to lock the gate. But, when a landholder is worried about too many elk, the problem comes down to a fairly simple choice: Put up with hunters from town or live with a herd of elk on the pasture. These may not be the alternatives some landholders prefer, but they’re the only ones those of us who own the elk will accept. When you ask a neighbor for help, you have to be willing to meet halfway.
We left the notion of the “king’s deer” far behind us when we came to the New World. Wyoming’s elk belong to us all. We should all have an equal chance of hunting them.
I will add one other thing – the game and fish claiming elk populations on the west side of the state as well, is a total crock. Most of the general areas i’ve hunted are getting to be difficult to see an elk, and some of the sought after limited quota areas are becoming the same way. A lot of these areas used to be great elk hunting, but not so much anymore. Very poorly managed.
Very good article, i couldn’t agree more!
We farmed and raised our own hay for a hundred pair ranch here in Colorado. I can tell you why you don’t want all those hunters on you.pros or not the wrong thing gets shot. Your pasture gets trampled trash has to be picked up
The rancher has to pick his own people to come in to hunt. The government can’t be in control of that ever. Elk are hay eaters not brokers like little deer. These gig hooves to grat damage to grassland; our native hay crop esp. If being pursued by a hunter.
Landowners must be required to at least allow walk-in hunters OR absolutely NO MONEY from the state, period.
They ought to have the government shooters shoot them and auction off the meat. Far better then cow, and worth twice the money. LIKE japan auctions a blue fin tuna every year!
If you are going to use hunter money to pay ranchers. Pay them for every cow elk shot on their land. Now they have incentive to let hunters on their land. Also if they get caught claiming elk that were not shot on their land they should have to pay back all of the money they received.
Well it’s Wyoming so don’t expect much
Well this can’t be! Ranchers n red neck Hunter’s say the wolves R devastating the elk population! U mean 2 say they would lie just 2 justify killing wolves- God’s creatures?
Just curious, I know we live in a fence out state to where if you don’t want someone or something in your property then you have to build something to keep it out. So why doesnt the game and fish have ranchers build a high fence, like they do next to the highways if they don’t want the elk eating “their” grass??
Good Idea.
Boom- hit the nail on the head!
Don’t allow more permits 2 if they won’t allow hunting kick the ranchers off State and Federal lands 3 perhaps if they allowed one bull to ten cows. Must reach cow cull before bull cull. There is more than one way to skin a cat
Your article is 100% correct and very well researched.
What is really happening is the “Privatization of the Public’s Fish & Wildlife and Public Lands”.
This is not a new concept. Landowners discovered the profitability of trophy hunting and fishing 50+ years ago. Outfitting for wildlife is much more lucrative than raising stock. Why work hard, brand, vaccinate, feed, and care for a domestic herd, when a single wild animal can bring 10 times the revenue to the landowners as a single cow? That’s the incentive for landowners to lock the gate and only allow outfitted hunts for antelope, deer, and elk. For decades, landowners have been the de-facto managers of the wildlife. The Game and Fish Department has been shouldered out of the wildlife managing business. The wild herds are under private control.
AG walks on a razors edge. I take my hat off to genuine ranchers and farmers. Wyoming is high and dry, with vicious winters. Traditional AG is a tough way to make a living! Raising stock is a labor of love & often a family tradition. Land and “AG” seems to stay in the family more than any other business.
However, landowners were given subsidies and tax shelters from the days before statehood. But the times have changed. The protections offered to agriculture producers were never intended to subsidize trophy hunting. In times long past, landowners opened the gate to local hunters and fishermen. The G&F managed the fish and wildlife, as it was intended. But the rise of trophy hunting & fushing has become a major revenue source for landowners. Gone are the days when a resident could knock on the door, or send a self addressed stamped envelope to ask permission to hunt or fish. Try that now, and you’ll be directed to contact the outfitter or “Wildlife Manager” i.e. pay the high prices that non-residents pay. Or put another way, ypay for access to “The King’s” deer.
True AG producers are becoming rare. God bless the ranchers and farmers who make their living from their AG operation! It’s a tough way to make a living and a labor of love.
But the mis-management of the wildlife for profit is a blight on YOUR wildlife. Resident sportsmen are turned away. Wild herds of elk are eating the grass and hay that livestock need. The wildlife herds are managed for profit only, and the health of the wildlife herds suffer. CWD is rampant as a result of the privatization of the wildlife. Surface damage has risen, but the out of control surface damage is a beast that certain landowners have brought upon themselves. The landowners who run outfitted hunts are finding less and less enthusiastic support from the resident sportsmen. Some landowners take things into their own hands. 25 years ago we had the Carter Mountain elk slaughter debacle where the landowner opened fire on the elk herd with an SKS. The biggest case of poaching went to court and the landowner’s fine was less than his surface damage settlement! The taxpayers, sportsmen, and the schools payed that bill, not to mention the wasted spoiled elk left to suffer and rot in the field. Not AG’s finest moment. Wildlife management has gotten worse in the 21st century.
Equally insidious is the coveting of landowner tags. There is an unending fight to allow “transferable landowner permits” as your article mentions. The landowner tags were intended to allow landowners to harvest a few head of wildlife. But certain landowners wish to sell their additional tags to outfitted hunters.
During my first term as a Republican Legislator, I joined Democrat Legislator, Dick Sadler on a bill that allowed additional landowner tags for female (non antlered) animals only. A doe deer or a cow elk eats as much grass or hay as an antlered animal. Our bi-partisan bill was never allowed to see the light of day. The landowners want transferable additional tags for trophy animals, and their efforts to do that are tireless and un-ending. They even turn to hunting vermin such as prairie dogs for outfitted hunts and revenue. A rancher friend once told me that no real rancher wanted prairie dogs on his place! That was in 2001. Try to find a place that welcomes you to shoot prairie dogs tesponsibly. I’ll wait.
Wyoming politics operate like it did in the 1800’s. Look into your candidate’s background this election season. If landowners make up 2% of the citizenry, why are 60% of the legislators either landowners or landowners extended family? Vote informed on August 20. Your tradition as resident sportsmen is at stake.
Chris Madson NAILED IT!! Same major problem here in Montana. They call it “Buck$ for Bull$”. I’m a 70 year old handicapped, retired Veteran and taught 12 years in western Wyoming. Last year I drew a bull tag here in Montana….contacted 17 ranchers/land owners within 50 miles of my home…NO ONE would give me or my grand son and grand daughter permission to hunt for our six week rifle season. They were ALL outfitted….. Being ranch raised myself, I’ve helped many brand, helped fight fires, closed open gates, and fixed elk torn fences….yet when ask to hunt..NO! Greed and money has definitely turned hunting into “The King’s Elk”:…..SAD!!!
You have stated the root of the problem. Now the legislature needs to quit be self serving. How about if that legislator is a landowner they should not have a voice or vote on this matter.
I have been born into ranching. As a child we ran 1000 sheep and 200 cows. I was born in 1948. And still struggle with what happens every year. You may have your college degree, it is worthless when it comes to living with the wild life and livestock. For us to feed our livestock the alfalfa and hay forage is the most valuable of all things in ranching….. Each cow for example needs 2.5 ton of hay each year. It is necessary to keep our livestock off the meadows year long. To produce the hey resources required. To keep the wild life off is a totally different story. Fear instilled in the wildlife works the best.fall cow elk tags on that rancher meadows. Make arrangements to kill 30 cow elk in mass in one day. In a 300! acre area. I will assure you those elk will not return
With a few scare crows and trucks parked around that meadow. The Elk are not stupid. This has to be done on a very religious procedure. You have to make sure they have adequate food source somewhere else . The range on the mountain is in a vast and expansive nature. The problem for everything not survive is where do they live November to April..The rancher most understand what needs to be done and a foreign wild life biologist from Baltimore is not going to get irregardless of his degree. It takes three years before an established plan works. And each years adjustment are made. I hate the people from the city that come to the ranch to hunt..
I manage that also if you want to come here and hunt I must know who you are.ee will have a mass meeting at the ranch. The each hunter will. Do his scouting, by coming and we fix fence destroyed by the wildlife. If you Mister hunter do not want to fix fence you do not hunt on this private ranch. This is for cow harvest only. Yes we have been selling the Bull elk hunts. When our land real estate taxes are reaching $75,000 we need some help or we will not be here. Every body needs to wake up. !!!
Sam, I live in Oregon and I’ll come spend some time mending fence or any other ranch duties so I can hunt your property.
Amazing how nobody wants the government involved, until their in need of a subsidy.
If a rancher won’t let anyone on his property to hunt elk the taxpayers should not have to pay the rancher for his loss and the rancher isn’t aloud to shoot the elk either because his ranch is posted no trespassing
Very True. Because their selling the elk, deer, and antelope the State should tax them as a business not ag land. That should get their attention but never doubt how deep the pockets are of the “absentee owners”!!!!
I live in Georgia. I own a home in an urban area, just over a quarter acre. I have an over abundance of squirrels, chipmunks, and even a couple of destructive raccoons living in my huge poplar trees. Does this mean I should be forced to allow squirrel hunters access to my property since I don’t own the wildlife? That’s no different than what you are asking these ranch owners to do. There’s no way anyone should be bullied by the government into allowing hunters to trespass onto their property. You may have the right to hunt wildlife, but you do not have the right to trample on another person’s private property rights to do so.
Are you demanding the government pay for the damage done to your property by these squirrels, chipmunks, and destructive raccoons? If not then this is not a good comparison.
maybe keep the livestock off public land which will = more food for the elk which will = less elk on the private land. There ya go Magnana and your welfare cowpokes, that solves the problem of wildlife parking on the ranches. That should be a simple solution to those rugged individualists who supposedly don’t believe in Gub’mint cheese
Maybe get rid of the damn wolves and there would be more elk. If you take livestock off public land you’re gonna pay $15 a pound for hamburger.
Chris, some years ago G&F felt compelled to try to kill two elk problems with one shot in the Cody-Meeteetse area. A huge number of Yellowstone-Thorofare elk migrate to the lower South Fork of the Shoshone and the Greybull River to winter over. They hit hay pastures and stack yards pretty hard…remember the guy from the 91 Ranch in Meeteetse who slaughtered at least 19 elk with an SKS assault rifle cuz he couldn’t get G&F to do anything about those damn elk ? You could do out any morning in winter and see two large herds of elk ont the Greybull …one with 5,000 animals, the other with 2800. Many thousands more were dispersed.
At that same time G&F was mandated to do something about brucellosis, because it was Yellowstone elk infecting domestic stock thereabouts and herds were being quarantined. G&F conjured up a schützenfest of elk…they extended the cow elk hunting season into FEBRUARY !!!! and gave away the licenses. A local could kill up to 3 elk that time. Except nobody took them up on it. Nobody wanted to hunt in January for meat and take a chance on diseased animals. It was a huge flop.
I’m sorry to have to say it, but Game & Fish is more an adjunct of the Wyoming Stockgrowers in too many cases. On level fields I am generally against letting cattlemen determine how we manage wildlife. I always point out it’s called the Fish and GAME department , not wildlife. When you manage wildlife as a commodity for monetary purposes , that6’s when they become Game and a crop , not a free range population of native animals. Too many elk are managed as cattle. Follow the money.
I have friends here in Missouri who will shoot cows for meat. Keep us posted! I work summers in Wyoming educating youth and adults on shooting safety and wildfife conservation at Camp Buffalo Bill BSA, Cody, Wy. May to August. We are 8 miles east of Yellowstone NWP in the Shoshone N.F. on Hwy14,16,20.
Take care of our great wild lands! Andy Gerrard director of CBB Range and Target Sports.
I have asked permission to hunt on Jose land in willows and was even turned in to Oregon fish and game for even asklng
I’ve hunted I montana all my life and when respect land owners rites. Too many want a be hunters and out of state’s think that just because they buy a tag or pay an expensive out of state tag they have the rite to go anywhere they choose. Take down fences- go off prescribed roads- leave waist and garbage everywhere. It sed to be where we could take our kids out and hunt with respect for the landowners and wild life. Outfitters and gready land owners have destroyed this. They think they have the rite to make up the rules aware destroying hunting. If a land owners won’t allow hunters in then the fish and game should uses methods like planes or helicopters to heard the elk out of these areas to other areas where they can have the numbers reduced by in state and local hunters.
This is why i will never donate another dime to access yes. Been kicked out of too many places that i was legal to hunt through the program because a damn outfitter was there or the landowner simply wouldn’t allow it, even though they are getting paid for it. And reporting it to the game and fish obviously goes nowhere.
Why is this not something that could be put on the ballot in some form and let the the people decide if their tax dollars should be used to reimburse ranchers who are not willing to open up their property to hunting ?
I understand where you’re coming from, but the problem IS hunter’s. Or rather, disrespectful hunters. People who cut fences, leave trash leave gates open etc. They make ranchers not want to let people on their property. They let people on they know they can trust, I know because I have been allowed to hunt that way. The solution is simple. BE the kind of people you’d let on your property and people will let you hunt their property!
I respect private property and don’t blame the land owners for keeping out hunters that are pigs. It only takes a few to spoil it for the many who are generally good stewards of the land . Hunting has gotten to be a joke in many cases as big money rules. Kind of discussing for the average hunter. The native Americans didn’t have a word for the concept of private lands.you think you own your property, just don’t pay your taxes for a year and see what happens. There should be government intervention when it comes to public wildlife in a good way. Let’s give wildlife a voice and place, taking the big money control out of the picture.
Do like Montana Block Management. If the rancher complains he has to let hunters in. Most people can tell the difference between elk and cattle. By selling more licenses it would help compensate the rancher for feed losses. The funds would help game and fish do their jobs also. Have the harvest during peak of activity. Maybe a limited quota factor. Thank you for chance to comment.
Great article! Keep fighting. Your reference to the so called “freedom caucus” was spot on. The only freedoms they readily support are the ability of a wealthy man to increase that wealth and in turn “donate” to their political campaign war chests.
In other States, The Same problem occurs, It’s just Called “Leasing”. Even if The Landowners DON’T hunt that particular piece of ground, ( or it’s Strickly Limited ) – even neighboring properties around the “Leased properties”, that are being Sub-leased to keep hunters from hunting. Hunters are forced to pay large amounts of money, and/or – no access to Wildlife to hunt. It’s the same problem, for the many on both sides of that plate. Then comes Other problems, for example; the issue of Baiting, ( in this article, its feed ), it will keep Wildlife On a piece of property – ( Leased property ), which creates Other Longterm Wildlife Management problems down the road, – (It’ll expedite the spread CWD, in cervids. As well as, due too Wildlife adapt to hunting pressure on a particular piece of ground. They all go hand and hand.) Around and Around we go. We are witnessing The Dollar, Politics, Greed, Killing Wildlife 24/7, right before our very eyes, in our lifetime,.. again. I don’t have All the answers, but it’s not a big shock, the Landowners or the Rich, keep having their hands out or in the till, at the expense of Wildlife. I Would encourage ALL sides to come to the table, and do the Right Thing, for the Right reasons, for ALL. It seems to be a National Cancer, that we all suffer from. There’s got to be a Better answer.
How about if everyone on the ranch hunt gets a bull tag and a bonus cow tag with it
I really like this article. My hunting buddies and I have hunted Wyoming on a few occasions for elk .we fish to .we have put in for non resident tags for several years now with no success we even buy the preference points every year we skipped this year in Hope’s of drawing in 2025 .with that said outside of license fees I myself spend around 4000.00 on one trip this kind of money into the state you would think they would vaule but we never use guides so I guess they think that this is loss revenue I would like to thank a guy like you who stands up for the guys like us so Thank u very much sir .
Funny how money can change attitudes! Perhaps another approach would be
Which ever private landowner complains gets paid for losses due to wild game has to agree to open hunting on private property before collecting,or after so many complaints. NO MATTER WHAT WILD GAME ON PRIVATE PROPERTY BECOME UNACCESSIBLE TO MANGEMENT WITHOUT A MECHANISM IN PLAY FOR MANGEMENT. CHARGING FOR THE ACCESS IS ECONOMICS AND KINGS HAVE MORE MONEY
To take your story one step further. Here in the state of Colorado specifically in the states nw area. The kings elk ,are unapproachable living on two private ranches. After being ,chased in season one and two by outfitters who make money on our shared ownership of elk. The elk have become trained to know where there safe ,heard on to the ranches where the ranchers are allowed to sale licenses ,collect $ and hunt for the animals. Privatizing, the heards. You can sit and watch them by the hundreds. Again,in another area one rancher stated to me ,he couldn’t allow me to hunt,as he sales the rights to a famous gun maker for 1000 per rifle ,which pays his taxes on property each year. (That thousand probably 2 thousand now )
So economic,game management is no different then the kings animals. The value of the hunt ,or chosen sharp shooters or allowing ranchers to dictate hunts. Is nothing more then privatizing,capitalizing the heards ! State game management,makes deals with ranchers , which can help ,or cause more problems. Point is when $$get involved heard management becomes economics and who gets to make the money
My mom’s 372 acres, are on Lander’s west side. For 5 years starting in 2017, mom had an average of 400 elk on her land. She would go out in the fourwheel pickup blowing the horn chasing them out of her pasture. She would have me take my hunting rifle shooting at them. But wouldn’t let me harvest one. My own mother.
My half sister and her husband got my grandfather’s ranch. Closer to Lander on the same road, that goes to moms place. Borders Lander city limits. She would go out on the fourwheeler, whooping and hollering at the 200 to 300 head of elk on her land, to run them out to the neighbors land. I built a elk proof fence around moms hay stack. Sister and mom, would NOT let anyone harvest an elk. Period!! The reason the elk are on the edge of Lander Wyoming, at SPRIGGS lane, Sinkscanyon / Squaw Creek Rd, North Fork Rd. IS BECAUSE OF THE WOLVES HAVE PUSHED THEM ALMOST INTO TOWN. Mom died March 30 2023. My half sister got moms place. So you go up SPRIGGS DR. in Lander, it turns to SPRIGGS LANE, at the city limit. For the whole road, Elk ALL over in the fall and winter. No access. And all they do is complain about the elk , and try to run em out. Hellova note, when family won’t even let ya go get one. Be-ins I’m totally disabled, because extremely severe osteoporosis. You have a wonderful day. BOUT DAM TIME WE HAD A WOMAN PRESIDENT 🔵🇺🇸🤠❤️😺💜 WYOMING 🇺🇸🔵💞
Very well written article. Although this probably isn’t just in Wyoming Although it may be worse there. If a rancher/farmer wants any type of funds from fish and game they sould allow the public with no charge to hunt or no dough. You can’t have it both ways. I believe they do have a right to know who’s on there property and when and where but that can be worked out. I’m really tired of all these ranchers crying about the elk eating up there profits but don’t want to do anything about it.
Very well written article. Although this probably is just in Wyoming Although it may be worse there. If a rancher/farmer wants any type of funds from fish and game they sould allow the public with no charge to hunt or no dough. You can’t have it both ways. I believe they do have a right to know who’s on there property and when and where but that can be worked out. I’m really tired of all these ranchers crying about the elk eating up there profits but don’t want to do anything about it.
Spot on Chris. One of the best articles I’ve read in quite some time. Hope you made copies available to the Legislature and WG&F. Sadly, a few big ranchers thinking they own not just the land (including the public land we the people pay to administer), but also the animals and the people of Wyoming, has been an ongoing problem.
Some good points made. One part I think deserves clarification… Those licensed to hunt, controlled by the WGFD, “It is administered fairly, without prejudice, and available to anyone who cares to participate.” Technically, those landowners that qualify for landowner tags get first dibs on the overall quotas, taking tags out of the number offered to the general public. So, right or wrong, the tag allocation is very prejudiced.
Great article. I live in NM and the landowner tag scheme is nothing short of a racket. Bull elk tags in high demand areas are sold for tens of thousands of dollars and even a cow elk tag is $500. Many landowners contract with outfitters and that increases the cost even more.
Worse than that, landowner tags are removed from the draw so what is left after they take their share is roughly 70% of the actual approved harvest #’s. So regular hunters, who pay for the programs are cut off from about 30% of the draw. This is across the board for elk, deer, and antelope. No wonder drawing tags in NM is a rarity.
I really like the breakdown of the percentage of the contributions ranching makes to the state. I couldn’t agree more that the ranchers can’t have it both ways. Access across their lands to public lands should be enshrined in law to avoid the ‘corner crossing’ controversy.
A very well written and researched article.
Great article Chris! I appreciate you taking the time to put pen to paper. Hoping and praying Wyoming does the right thing and provides reasonable solutions.
Facing a similar situation in CO, land owners receive a tag owning 160 acres, more acres more tags. Plus crop damage tags and so forth. But if you own a huntable piece of property under 160 acres, your in the draw, no preference point or anything. I hunt for meat, cow elk taste better anyway. I have been unsuccessful in the draw for 2 years, on my own land. But I can buy a tag from big land neighbors for 1500$. What the heck, resident tag is 56$. Rules need to be reviewed and changed!
I agree totally. The Wyoming Government is totally corrupted.I am watching the maga rich cattle association zero out the wild mustangs on herd management areas and putting thousands of cattle out on land they claimed didn’t have enough grass or water to sustain them. Now they are ready to anilalate the wildlife. Someone needs to stop letting 3% of the state control the welfare of the wildlife on the public range that connects to the private property that isn’t fenced. The Wyoming government/BLM is allowing migration paths for the shrinking antelope population to be leased to mining and oil. I agree with you. The elk should not be controlled by ranchers.
You mean the wolves are not decimating the elk as ranchers n Hunter’s claimed would happen? You mean they lied ?
Oh the wolves are having there impact on the wea
stern side. G&F just won’t admit it. They still have licenses to sell.
Great article Chris!! I’ve hunted the area around the old Diamond Guest ranch for years until an outfitter moved in. I cannot blame the landowners for opting for this. For cattle operations that are generations old need to make money. That being said, land west of this once great area is off limits for hunting, funny every one referred to them as the “King George”, they had a sign posted $5000. dollar fine per day. They do not allow any hunting what so ever. Naturally the elk move at night and are usually back on that property by first light.
It’s my opinion, that GF, Wy stock growers, and the Wy outfitters are all in bed together. Give tags to the land owners will eventually turn private land hunting a rich man’s game.
WyGf, really doesn’t care about the average hunter, walk in areas are great for deer and antelope, but not really appropriate for elk. Think about several miles in, harvest an elk, bull or cow, then trek it out. For some maybe, but not always good for others. I know it’s a choice.
I’d like to offer something up for thought, why can’t we come up with a way to vet hunters to allow access for landowners to evaluate if they are comfortable with those hunters having access. Basically a hunters resume, using previous experiences from other landowners. I myself have always been greatful to the landowners of the land that they permitted to hunt. I would help with branding, fence repairs, and provide smoked hams for Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Just a thought…
I try to refrain from reading the mindless garbage published here, but given my immense interest in hunting and fishing in my state I held my nose and plowed through.
Mr Madson’s argument about the king’s wildlife completely ignores the fact that part and parcel of the freedoms our forefathers recognized is the right to purchase and control property. If Mr. Madison is so hell bent on hunting private land he can always go purchase land (or lease hunting rights) to hunt wherever he may.
The absurd argument that individuals should be forced in some way to grant access to his/her property is somewhat akin to telling the average homeowner they too must surrender unfettered access if there is something of public value in the home. Imagine the outrage that would generate.
I have not owned farm or ranch land for several years (easier ways to make a living), but I well remember Joe Q. Public’s sometimes callous disregard for what was, through hard work, mine not his! Countless hours spent chasing cattle (often after midnight) because gates were left open. Literally truckloads of garbage hauled to the dump, and more than once, finding property (including cows and calves) shot.
The Wyoming Game and Fish relish in telling us that they (the state) own the wildlife. They seek, and are reimbursed by the courts when “their” animals are illegally taken. They seize personal property associated with illegally taking game.
They can (and should) either find a way to adequately reimburse for the damages caused by “their” animals, or better control the numbers. To believe that these animals solely reside on private property, and cannot therefore be better controlled because of private landowners defies common sense.
At the end of the day something does need to be done to address the issue. That said, to make villians of hard working landowners will only serve to exacerbate, not eleviate the problem.
If private landowners don’t want wildlife trespassing onto their property, is it not their responsibility to erect appropriate fencing? Why should the public be on the hook for reimbursement for wild animals foraging? I certainly can’t make the town reimburse me for the flowers the deer eat or the quakies the beavers take. The state has offered a reasonable solution to landowners plagued by elk: allow hunters in to reduce their numbers and scatter them. Otherwise, they’ll simply have to take the responsibility to keep them out of their pastures and hay.
All well and good. I’m a great advocate for private property. And people will always be prone to getting things good and screwed up, wherever they go. But the wildlife doesn’t belong to a select few. They belong to We the People. It’s absurd that just because you hate hunters, you’d have a few people come to slay scores of these animals-at the people’s expense. What a stinking insult.
To put it in perspective, our public lands are being managed just like our elk herds. There’s one distinction along this thought that cannot go unobserved: public or private, elk or bovine, the public at large always pays for the loss. No. Matter. What.
It’s obvious that the large landowners and Wyoming stock growers want to have total control of both public lands and the State’s wildlife and quite possibly the Wyoming Game & Fish are in on the take. Gordon’s appointment of the Game and Fish Director has been a train wreck and it’s high time that this directorship becomes an electable position and he or she would be accountable to the people. Some of the Game and Fish Commissioners have not been great appointees, such as the previous Cody region Commissioner. While I’m at it, the Wyoming Outfitters and Guides should have zero power in determining the fate of our wildlife. Let’s just get rid of all commercialism of our wildlife. Again, the people need to have control, not the Governor, WYOGA, Magnagna or their cronies
Steve Mitchell you are spot on nice to see people take a stand I would love to but I’m no speaker.
If the public can hunt on private property for ELK then the public should be able to hunt any animal on private land ! I’m not for the public hunting on private land you can’t single out any animal that’s discrimination!!!! If private land owners don’t want wildlife on property put a fence up or deal with it !!! I had to put a fence up to keep wildlife out my garden !! People gonna say that is a different situation but it’s not. So build a fence problem solved!!
Great article Chris. One thing that should also be mentioned is the huge acreage of public lands that are land locked by private lands and cannot be accessed by the public which own these lands. Much of these lands are used exclusively by the very private landowners blocking access to these lands. On top of that private landowners lease grazing rights on public lands at below market value. I’m willing for us all to work together to solve these problems, however, it needs to be done fairly and equitably. We need to stick to the North American model which has worked so well for wildlife management in this country.
Not sure what part of the north your talking about but management hasn’t been working so well here there is a big decline in the numbers of elk and deer here in the big horn basin
The North American model is hopelessly flawed. It was entirely set up to be run by and for hunters— both trophy , recreational, and commercial . But it totally ignored predators. otherwise we would have never exterminated grizzlies, wolves, and cougars. Every herbivore requires complememntary carnivores to maintain the balance of bothj. The North American Model failed on that important parameter. We should fix that. Example : the best way to control the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease is a strong predator agent.
This is all Abe’s fault. The Lincoln administration created the checkerboard land to encourage the building of the railroad..At about the same time “THE OPEN RANGE POLICY” was also created. Wyoming and many other states still have the open range policy…..So if you don’t want sheep or goats or llamas or horses or cattle or buffalo or cattle or elk or any other 4 legged critters on your land then you have to FENCE THEM OUT….The solution is: Do a land swap in the checkerboard areas which would allow the public access to keep the elk population under control….Problem solved…
Way to go Chris, I fully agree with your comments. Our state Government and our game and fish have completely ignored the rights of the people. If a land owner sees his forage completely consumed by elk or any other species and he refuses to allow public hunting, he can always buy feed and build a feed lot and enjoy that.
I just shake my head and have to laugh while the state allows a “rancher” to forbid hunting on his range, then pay him for lost feed, the only way I can see this happening is because someone is making money or assuring votes all at the expense to the citizens of Wyoming.
Great piece. Well researched and written by someone who knows what they’re talking about. What has happened to the rugged individualism of “real Wyomingites” who want to help themselves instead of demanding that the “government” takes care of them? The game and fish department already spends a lot of sportsmens’ dollars on wildlife depredation for private landowners. Why can’t they help themselves by allowing regular folks to hunt on their lands to reduce their problems?
I agree with Madson. Some of the core problem is that the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission AND the G&F Director are appointed by the Governor. This gives far too much power to the Governor in wildlife matters. I am certain these drastic measures we now see are a result of that.
Well said. G n F director Nesvik has been a godsend to the large landowners and outfitters but a disaster for the sportsman and woman. Don’t let that screen door…Nesvik
Very well stated. The new type 8 tags for cow elk in many largely private land areas are also available. Unlimited and ready to help reduce the cow elk population. The part about roads, internet, schools, hospitals, fire and police protection get forgotten or ignored by those that deny public access. The wildlife of WY is a huge part of why we all live here. Remember it belongs to the whole state and we are ready to help control the numbers.
I agree with all this!
F the welfare rancher and all the kings men. Give me a gun and a bugle and an elk to shoot. Besides that, I’m hungry and can’t afford to eat beef anymore.
You still have to have permission to hunt private land. Hunters have been inclined to be rather disrespectful of that land which is a huge reason ranchers don’t want them there. I’ve been on both sides of this. I know people who are. You can’t leave gates open , and trash all over and go in without permission and expect hugs and warm welcomes.