HB0060 - Excess Wildlife Population Damage - Not sure on this one

[wyoelkfan15]

This bill passed it's second reading in the house yesterday. I'm not in support of providing landowners more subsidies without some sort of access to the elk causing the damage. Any other's thoughts would be welcome. I wrote my congressmen in opposition of the bill on Monday.

https://www.wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2024/HB0060

 

[Wy067]

Concur with wyoelkfan15. I'd think there's a lot of ambiguity in the "reasonable" hunting access on their property. What does that mean? Enrolled in the HMA program? For what it's worth - depending on the area and species, I've had very limited success in getting permission to hunt by using the hunter/landowner assistance program. Had better luck in checking with biologist/game warden on landowners looking for help.

 

[wyoelkfan15]

Concur with wyoelkfan15. I'd think there's a lot of ambiguity in the "reasonable" hunting access on their property. What does that mean? Enrolled in the HMA program? For what it's worth - depending on the area and species, I've had very limited success in getting permission to hunt by using the hunter/landowner assistance program. Had better luck in checking with biologist/game warden on landowners looking for help.

I've had the exact same experience with the landowner assistance program. Have called multiple landowners listed and heard nothing but crickets.

I'm not opposed to landowners receiving compensation, I just think this bill does nothing to help the actual issue of regionally overpopulated elk herds. If anything it gives incentives for landowners to continue to harbor elk herds with no access granted to the public.

 

[nrpate05]

It would be a ginormous hit to WYGFD's budget as well. That extra money has to come from somewhere...

 

[wyoelkfan15]

More updates from the legislature. If you have the interest and time I'd encourage you to voice your opinions to our legislatures.

‘Unrestricted hunting’ out, market value in, as elk damage payments bill advances - WyoFile

Lawmakers reduce rancher compensation for wildlife-eaten grass from 150% to 100%, but shoot down guaranteed access for public hunters.

wyofile.com

 

[manitou1]

Ranchers pay $8.00 a year per cow to graze public... but we tax payers are supposed to pay them 150% of damage caused by wildlife eating their grass?
Come on now... another rancher welfare handout.
Why?
Because most of our politicians are ranchers!
Yet they just shot down the ONLY meaningful property tax bill in the House.
It's not about taking care of their constituants... it is about lining their pockets!

Imagine if you will if cattle ranchers in Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas,or ANY OTHER STATE were reimbursed for the grass and crops that oppossums, raccoons, geese, turkey and deer eat!

It's the cost of doing business! You are on the wildlife's turf!


Aren't the ranchers making money off selling hunts or contracting with outfitters to sell the states wildlife to hunters already?
I'll answer that: Yes they are... and moreso by outfitting and selling hunts on landlocked public lands that they use as their own!

 

[wyoelkfan15]

Ranchers pay $8.00 a year per cow to graze public... but we tax payers are supposed to pay them 150% of damage caused by wildlife eating their grass?
Come on now... another rancher welfare handout.
Why?
Because most of our politicians are ranchers!
Yet they just shot down the ONLY meaningful property tax bill in the House.
It's not about taking care of their constituants... it is about lining their pockets!

Imagine if you will if cattle ranchers in Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas,or ANY OTHER STATE were reimbursed for the grass and crops that oppossums, raccoons, geese, turkey and deer eat!

It's the cost of doing business! You are on the wildlife's turf!


Aren't the ranchers making money off selling hunts or contracting with outfitters to sell the states wildlife to hunters already?
I'll answer that: Yes they are... and moreso by outfitting and selling hunts on landlocked public lands that they use as their own!

I agree on all points. I would encourage you to write your senators, this passed through the house and is going back to the senate for debate. Wyoming legislatures contact page may be found here:

https://www.wyoleg.gov/Legislators/2024/S

 

[BuzzH]

Just for clarity, this has the potential to cost the GF up to 12 million a year in damage claims. Very least would be about 2 million a year.

Meaning programs would be cut, and since the GF receives no general money this would be license dollars funding it.

 

[rjthehunter]

Wow. What a ridiculous bill to propose... That would be like me thinking the government should pay me for every tree the beavers cut down on my property. I could make 100s of thousands a year.

The answer is written out in crayon and they still can't understand it...

If you want less elk, let elk hunters harvest elk. Theres plenty of people who just want some meat.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Is this the case of ranchers still pretty much holding cow elk hostage for those transferrable bull tags?

It always seems like that is where we end up at when we are talking about Wyoming ranchers and elk.

 

[quarterhorse]

Lets be realistic. Most ranchers don't want fewer elk, they want more money from elk being there. Preferably as a handout.

This will pass easily. It's like asking the politicians to not give themselves a handout...

 

[WanderWoman]

Just for clarity, this has the potential to cost the GF up to 12 million a year in damage claims. Very least would be about 2 million a year.

Meaning programs would be cut, and since the GF receives no general money this would be license dollars funding it.

Would this also affect WY’s ability to get PR match? I know in MT if they reimbursed landowners for game damage, depending on the source, it would have hindered their ability to get federal PR dollars because those dollars cannot be used to pay landowners for game damage. If so, the consequences could be significant.

 

[appaloosa]

Why is it that when publicly owned wildlife utilize private land is it considered "damage", but when privately owned livestock utilize public land its considered "beneficial use"?

In this case, landowners would be paid $45/AUM for forage utilized by wildlife, meanwhile, most public land grazing leases go for roughly $1.50/AUM.

 

[sclancy27]

WY legislature looked at MT and said "hold my beer". I have a feeling we will be fighting a very similar bill in MT in about 10 months.

 

[WYelker]

This is a horrible bill. I sent emails to 2 days ago and no response at all.

I highlighted that this would be a great way to gut and hurt the HMA and the Access YES programs.

Instead of creating this new cost the state should look at ways to sweeten the pot for those who are willing to enroll lands into the the HMA or Access programs.

Reasonable access should/could be defined as participation in the HMA or Access YES program.

 

[elkantlers]

Concur with wyoelkfan15. I'd think there's a lot of ambiguity in the "reasonable" hunting access on their property. What does that mean? Enrolled in the HMA program? For what it's worth - depending on the area and species, I've had very limited success in getting permission to hunt by using the hunter/landowner assistance program. Had better luck in checking with biologist/game warden on landowners looking for help.

Why would they want you to Haze the critters off their land when that is how they get their big checks?

 

[wyoelkfan15]

just giving this thread an update, if you are a state of wyoming resident, and haven't given your opinion to your state legislative, now's your time. this is in committee this week. Link to your state congressman above.

 

[WYelker]

just giving this thread an update, if you are a state of wyoming resident, and haven't given your opinion to your state legislative, now's your time. this is in committee this week. Link to your state congressman above.

Sent mine last week. I strongly hammered the reasonable access definition. And said they should change the wording to include that property must be enrolled in the HMA or access YES programs instead.

I encouraged them to make the access yes and the hma programs so great that landowners want to enroll.

 

[BuzzH]

This bill was amended in senate trw to get 5 million from the general fund to cover compensation.

 

[perma]

Email sent.