NLBS 3.03 - Wyoming Is Off Limits for Photos, Drawings, Images, Data Collection, and More

a reply to: Halfswede

The part that I took from it was "an ownership interest in the real property". If it's public land, we all have an ownership interest in the property because we all own it. That would be my argument in court.

Some of this Illegal data collection to be sure.

We're taking a trip up north to Wyoming soon and I'm not leaving my camera behind.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

Is this the same type of law that governs the same subject in places like Area51 and other sites of that nature ?
Im not American so im not up on all that kind of thing but it is interesting and i learn what i can .

Or is it an edit of that same type of law because of the public up there?

Just curious

-O

So I assume this picture taken by SNS Outfitter and Guides on a hunting trip, is illegally obtained?

It is taken on state owned land in the middle of a privately owned cattle ranch belonging to Mr. Sy Gilliland in Lysite Wyoming
Where they given permission to take the picture or did they capture it before the law went into effect?

I still can't link, please forgive me The title of the article is "Yawning hole opens in Central Wyoming"

This is ridiculous, it reminds of visits to Eastern Europe during the occupation by Russia. Is there no opposition?
I thought I had moved back to "The Home of The Free", it is dawning on me after ten years its the home of prohibition.

This just in "2500 Tourists arrested over weekend holidays. Camera turn in kiosks outnumber gun surrender kiosks"

Not really, but really

a reply to: theNLBS

wyoming is also a major destination for retiring spooks

originally posted by: antar
What? This is truly BS! Any good video out there of people breaking this new law? Live stream?

Here you go...Folks sending in Illegal Pics..

www.wyofile.com...

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
The real question here is, who owns this "open land"? The text of the document linked in the OP states that:

(ii ) " Open land " means land outside the exterior boundaries of any incorporated city, town, subdivision

So, the land isn't owned by some city or town. Is it nationally-, state- or county-owned? If so, that's public land, and taxpayers have a right to be there. If it's privately-owned, that is another matter. One segment uses the phrase, "private open land", which makes no sense. Private property is private, not "open". Why add the word "private" to such a document?

The bottom line here is that an environmental group "Western Watershed Project" has been documenting via pics and water samples the environmental impact of ranchers that they claim are allowing their cattle to ...ahem...sh*& ...in the streams and waterways (BLM) that provide drinking water for nearby and far off towns.

So Rancher X leases the right to graze his cattle on BLM/Public lands ..usually at a seriously small amount of $. It's a way for the gov to subsidize ranchers. The land is still public but the rancher can graze his cattle there under conditions...lets say for example (a) no more than 200 head of cattle and (b) keep them 200 yards from the river that supplies drinking water.

Someone takes a pic on public lands of a that rancher (a) grazing 1000 head instead of the 200 max agreed in his lease with BLM and (b) the 1000 cattle are standing on the banks of and in the river crapping and (c) that person collects water samples identifying massive levels of ecoli bacteria in the river where his nearby town gets their drinking water...

that person goes to jail for "collecting data" and pics on the public land without the rancher (who only leases the grazing rights from BLM) permission.

Plus they wrote the law liberally to pretty much arrest and fine whoever reports the ranchers for anything on public land...so they left plenty of room for prosecution.

that is the motivation anyways...

the "Western Watershed Project" collected water samples and pics and submitted them to the Wyoming "Department of Water Quality"...and the Wyoming Dept of Water Quality alerted the ranchers and refused to make the water results public...The ranchers decided they needed a law to prevent future issues with citizen scientists.

a reply to: Indigo5

Ah! That makes a lot more sense. I knew there had to be more to it than what I was seeing. So the ranchers abuse their privileges, and overstep bounds, and pollute water, and the government there, instead of fining them and imposing control, goes after the whistleblowers. Wow........

So much for the government actually caring about the environment, or safe drinking water!!

You know.......in that area, there is another solution. Those that now what is going on could go to houses, inform people of what's happening, and have a lot of people get their water tested. When the issue becomes huge as a result, those trying to cover it up would have a few problems with it at that point!!

Paying for the testing on that scale would be the only drawback.

a reply to: Indigo5

Thank you so much. You have no idea how much I appreciated that.

Does this mean if I'm vacationing with my family, I cannot take pictures of them or public tourist spots? That is a bit weird.

I lived in Wyoming, mainly Rocksprings and Pinedale, for the majority of my life. The ranching and natural gas industry is really all the state has to offer. The capita of the state is extremely low, the environment really sucks, i.e. very cold winters and half the year seems to be winter. 40° f in July. Yay. Anyway. There is a lot more to Wyoming than people are led to believe; government, local business owners. Look up some of the leading names in petroleum products and find a few connections. Long rant short, my perspective is they don't care. Elites don't stay that way by worrying about half a million people with tainted water. The water being only one of many notable tragedies that the state hides.

I do not abide in the acts and/or actions many recently witnessed regarding land grabbing/or land scourging. Likewise, the talking heads, speak with twisted tongues and generally misrepresent everything, in their favor. I do not believe the talking heads as they have proven opportunistic in grabbing land and making it clear on many levels they are instep, and inline with a larger agenda. This agenda strives to remove all land from the 'commoner' and only allow the gilded to hold land, or resources. I have known politicians and I have known ranchers...I will lean to the ranchers, who do need grazing lands for herds. In fact, it serves the land to have the grazing, and for it to be rotational...or we can go along with talking heads and rogue fires...with everyone playing a serf beholden to their "caretakers".

a reply to: theNLBS

I would say that this sounds like a maneuver to gather information. Obviously, the bill won't pass with the Republican control. Whoever wrote it (said to be the Republicans themselves), is using it to scare up fake-Reps, see who supports it and who knows what clues, cues and tidbits of info they want to rustle up with this bill that cannot pass.