Right now I am splitting my time between CA and MT. I'd be in MT full time but for my parents, who are in a nursing home in the Bay Area, so I have to be in CA a lot to help them.
Whether or not OP was trolling, the question is one I faced a few years ago. I ended up buying the land and having a hunting cabin built. For the first year, I flew to Montana about once a month for hunting and just enjoying freedom. The problem was that the more time I spent in Montana, the less I wanted to be in California and we ended up buying a house in Bozeman (I know, but we got a great deal on a beautiful old house that my wife fell in love with), then a vehicle for when we're in Montana, then all the furniture for the house, etc.
The point being, the odds of saving money by having hunting land in Montana while still living in CA are very low. Between travel costs and all the other expenses of maintaining two residences in different states, you ain't gonna come out ahead financially.
Also, while I hate CA for many things, there's still acceptable hunting opportunities in the state. My cousins live up near Lake Shasta and they do pretty well with deer hunting and fishing, all on public land. The state still makes life difficult for sportsmen, but all in all, they have good lives (thanks, in large part, to local government refusing to abide by the more draconian nonsense that the state pushes, such as CCW issuances). If I were planning to continue living and working in CA (which I'm not), I'd save the money that the OP intends to use to buy land in MT/WY and use it for out of state tag fees and maybe even guided hunts.
