Oil City News publishes letters, cartoons and opinions as a public service. The content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Oil City News or its employees. Letters to the editor can be submitted by following the link at our opinion section.

When ‘Republican values’ trump the rule of law

Dear Casper,

I have lived in Wyoming my entire life. I come from a multi-generational, historically rooted Wyoming family. And yet, as I watch the decisions being made for our beautiful state, I find it harder and harder to find a reason to stay.

Our leadership, and the parties they affiliate with, seem to consistently forget that laws are not mere suggestions to be ignored when they become inconvenient. Following them should be black and white.

For decades, Wyo. Stat. § 22-4-105 has ensured that the parties remain neutral vessels for the people’s will until we, the voters, choose our nominee. The recent move by the State Republican GOP to vet and endorse candidates before the primary isn’t just a change in strategy; it’s a dismissal of not only the state statute but also of the voters who live, work and vote here.

Secretary of State Chuck Gray has built a brand on “election integrity,” yet boasts that his actions — including those his critics have heavily questioned — are simply him upholding “Republican values.” But here lies a disturbing question: How can one claim to be the champion of election integrity while simultaneously supporting a party apparatus that treats the Wyoming Supreme Court’s rulings as optional?

For those who may think, “It’s just one candidate, what could the harm be?” let’s look at how Wyoming’s voting power is already so lopsided. Our party structure is built on a “one county, one vote” system. This means those in our least populated counties carry the same voting weight as the thousands of voters in Laramie or Natrona counties.

By allowing the Republican party to vet and endorse candidates before the public even sees the ballot, the GOP is effectively gerrymandering the primary. They are narrowing the field to only those who pass their “test,” stopping the average hardworking Wyomingite from ever truly weighing in.

This leads us to a fundamental question all voters in this state need to ask: Who does the Wyoming Republican Party think their boss is?

Is it the figureheads in Washington? A small circle of party elites in Douglas? Or is it us, their constituents — the ranchers, the miners, the teachers, the parents — who actually cast the votes and have to live with the consequences of the policies made for our state?

Jessica Mantell
Cheyenne

Homeowners associations do not align with Wyoming values

Dear Casper,

To start, having any HOA in Wyoming outside of Jackson seems wild to me. We are the most conservative, anti-big government state in the union. We as a collective are vehemently against taxation and governmental control.

So why then do we willingly allow and join HOA programs? These organizations are liberal government at its finest. You don’t actually own your properties that reside in an HOA as one rule infraction can cause you to lose everything you worked so hard for and already paid for.

Even AI understands this and I am putting an AI analysis of HOA’s below:

An overreaching liberal government and an HOA often function like the same creature wearing different uniforms. One calls it taxation, the other calls it fees, assessments, or compliance penalties, but the playbook stays suspiciously familiar: create layers of rules, attach financial punishment to violations, then claim it’s all for “community standards” or “public good.” In both systems, property owners are sold the idea of ownership, only to learn that missing a payment, painting a fence the wrong shade of beige, or cutting grass wrong. can trigger liens, legal threats, or attempts to seize what they already paid for. It stops looking like governance and starts looking like legalized extortion with meeting minutes.

As a people, we need to castrate all HOAs’ abilities to steal our homes, livelihoods and properties.

In my opinion, any person that joins an HOA board and enforces rules that can steal someone’s home or levy fines that would create a financial hardship over an RV parked on the property, wrong paint color or cutting grass is no longer a freedom-loving Wyomingite and is instead no better then the socialist governments of places like California or New York.

Mike Hinton
Casper

Related

Wyoming wildlife managers plan to reduce how many wolves can be hunted by 50% following a canine distemper outbreak that has cut the state’s wolf numbers to the lowest level in two decades.

A 22-wolf cap is the fewest number of wolves available to licensed Wyoming hunters since the state began allowing wolf hunting after Endangered Species Act protections were lifted in 2012. The limit also marks a significant decrease from last fall’s wolf hunting season.

“As far as the overall mortality limit, it’s exactly half,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department wolf biologist Ken Mills told WyoFile.

Last year, hunters could target a maximum of 44 wolves in the area around the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, where Wyoming classifies wolves as trophy game during the Sept. 15-Dec. 31 season. Hunters bound to Wyoming’s relatively tight regulations in that zone managed to kill 31 wolves.

It wasn’t hunting, however, that resulted in the lowest population since wolves were still being established after the 1995-96 Yellowstone National Park reintroduction. Biologists say a canine distemper outbreak is the primary culprit in the decline. The measles-like disease is especially deadly for puppies, and it was detected in 64% of the animals that Wyoming biologists handled during routine capture work last year.

As the calendar turned to 2026, Mills and federal biologists tallied 253 wolves and 14 breeding pairs statewide. Those are decreases, respectively, of 23% and 42% from the 330 wolves and 24 breeding pairs estimated at the end of 2024.

Wyoming’s proposed hunt for 2026 is designed to increase the wolf population in the trophy game area, located in the state’s mountainous northwest corner. The population in that zone decreased 19% to 132 wolves in 2025 — a figure that’s well below the state’s 160-animal objective.

“We want to grow the population by 28 wolves,” Mills said.

Driving Wyoming’s desire to increase numbers of the controversial native canine is the 160-wolf objective designed to ensure that the state meets its obligations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. When the state first gained jurisdiction over wolves 14 years ago, Wyoming’s delisting agreement called for maintaining at least 10 breeding pairs in the trophy game area. In 2025, there were exactly 10 breeding pairs, which shows that the margin for error is thin at the current lower population.

The reductions to Wyoming’s wolf hunting quotas aren’t uniform.

“The wolf numbers in the Cody, Lander and Pinedale regions were relatively stable in 2025,” Mills said. “The largest reduction was in the Jackson region.”

As a result, Game and Fish is proposing to reduce the limit, from 19 to six, for wolves that can be killed in four conjoined hunt areas (units 8, 9, 10 and 11) spanning from Jackson Hole into the Green River basin. The state’s draft regulations also call for relaxing the limit on wolves that can be hunted along the west slope of the Tetons and in the Teton Wilderness (units 6 and 7) from five animals to no more than two.

There are major differences in how the three northern Rocky Mountain states hunt wolves, and it’s unclear if Montana and Idaho will follow suit and decrease hunting pressure near Yellowstone National Park. Wyoming’s distemper outbreak was regionwide and also hit Yellowstone packs, which only managed to produce 17 surviving pups — the lowest count in 30 years of careful monitoring.

In Montana, where hunters and trappers can kill 15 wolves apiece, wildlife managers do use a quota system near the Yellowstone boundary to ease impacts on wolves that leave the park. Idaho, meanwhile, allows largely unfettered wolf hunting on the western side of the ecosystem.

Wyoming manages wolves similarly, with few regulations, on the outskirts of the Yellowstone region. Where the species is classified as a “predator” — in 85% of the state — wolves can be killed by almost any means and there are no hunting limits to be altered as a result of the population decline.

Game and Fish will host several northwestern Wyoming public meetings about its wolf hunting proposals. They’ll take place at 6 p.m. May 26 in Jackson; 6 p.m. May 28 in Cody; 6 p.m. June 2 in Pinedale; and 6 p.m. June 3 in Lander.

Public comments can be submitted at WGFD.wyo.gov/get-involved/public-input through June 10.

The state agency’s commission must also OK the draft hunting regulations. Commissioners plan to take up the issue at their July 14-15 meeting in Sheridan.

Mills anticipates hearing from detractors on both sides of the wolf hunting issue.

“There will be people frustrated that the mortality limit is lower,” he said, “and members of the public that probably think we shouldn’t hunt wolves at all.”