|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,891
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,891 |
Lots of uneducated BS and scare tactics in that article. There's plenty of over the counter opportunities for elk in Utah where a person can hunt every year and have a decent chance at a branch antlered bull. Also plenty of good cow hunts that go under-subscribed every year in units where you can also buy a bull tag OTC. Nothing better than stomping around the hills with both a bull and a cow tag in your pocket. And while Utah's deer hunts are draw only, there's opportunity to hunt every year if you choose. Might not be your first pick of a unit, but you could hunt every year, especially with a bow or muzzleloader. They also have a Dedicated Hunter Program that guarantees deer tags in three year increments as long as you abide by the guidelines, pay the fees, and do the required work hours (you can harvest two bucks in three years). Even if we grant that all of what you say above is true it is still deeply problematic from my point of view. Auction tags force agencies to manage for the good of the auction winners. Money equals influence, and when an agency relies upon such means of funding they are beholden to those who are winning the tags. That's just the way of the world. When sportsmen are the ones funding wildlife management it is managed for the interests of all. When you move away from that things get sketchy. It's really UnAmerican as has been pointed out. It's a step back toward the European model we rejected when we became our own country. Pretty much my thoughts too. I do have a question for those that live in points system states. Luckily we don't have that in Ky though it's been kicked around regarding our elk hunting. My question is it seems if you get in at the beginning it might be attractive to you but say you are a young fellow25 years from now that wants to take up elk hunting. Looks like to me you would never catch up to all those old coots that are sitting on a pile of points accumulated over the years. How do points states manage to avoid having a bunch of geezers that finally cashed in their 50 points wondering around with rifles strapped to their walkers hoping for a shot at an elk. Seems to me that if there isn't a use it or lose it rule that resets you to 0 ever 3-5 years then the system would be unsustainable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,454
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,454 |
Idaho seems to be the only western state that allows non-residents to compete equally with residents when applying for controlled hunt tags. While I admit to not really enjoying bumping into non-residents in the field, they support Idaho businesses and for the most part are easy on the game populations. Fat cat hunters on the other hand allowed to purchase Auction tag are reducing the number of tags available to everyone else and for the most part take trophy breeding animals out of the populations. There are game managers that will argue whether this is bad for a species or not but one has to realize the outfit they work for receives the proceeds of those auctions and can then build new very expensive HQ buildings and buy more pickups for them to drive around in . Idaho hunters have said they favor the system as is and are suspect of game managers seeking to increase revenues that do not directly benefit game and fish. We need to strongly oppose the politicians pretending to be game biologists ( i.e.: Virgil our F&G Director) and leave the system the way it is.
Good Hunting
Lj 10% of tags to non-residents in controlled hunt units is competing equally?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 826
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 826 |
When there are 10 tags for a specific controlled hunt and 9 residents plus one non-resident apply for that hunt the non-resident has an one in 10 chance of drawing that tag, just like everyone else. Take a look at western state regs. Without question Idaho has the most liberal regs. with regard to non-resident participation. I don't expect to be given the same state benefits as residents in another state when I seek to use resources when visiting and thats how it should be. The people of Florida should be able to set the limits on non -residents when setting quotas on alligators. The gators inhabit their state. We don't live in a perfect place where everyone is treated equally all the time but I believe Idaho's F&G regs are as close as you can get. Come to Idaho and hunt elk, with out points or drawings for those tags. The elk don't care where your from !
good hunting
Lj
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,454
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,454 |
When there are 10 tags for a specific controlled hunt and 9 residents plus one non-resident apply for that hunt the non-resident has an one in 10 chance of drawing that tag, just like everyone else.
Lj A one in 10 chance, now that's funny. When was the last time you saw 10 applications for ANY controlled hunt? And please explain a non-resident's odds in units with less than 10 overall tags.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 826
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 826 |
Well , Mr Wapiti, There's a chance you may be one of those people who truly expect fair treatment and equality for all. You are to be applauded for those ideals but this world, nature and the people in it don't behave that way, and most probably never will. I used to complain to a neighbor of mine (a retired F&G enforcement officer) , that the hunts in Idaho were not organized to properly manage the resources, namely game animals. His response was " they never were , and never will be, it's all about managing people to maximize money " . I can't explain how a controlled hunt with fewer tags than ten could be made fair for non-residents, under current quota regulations, because the non-resident is just " chit out of luck ". The system is run by people accountable to the residents of the state Idaho not Iowa and like the elk who is feeding one minute and running for his life from a hunter the next, it just ain't fair!!!. Remember the elk hate us all equally, that's a good sign ,maybe we are headed in the right direction after all.
Good Hunting
Lj
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,193
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,193 |
When there are 10 tags for a specific controlled hunt and 9 residents plus one non-resident apply for that hunt the non-resident has an one in 10 chance of drawing that tag, just like everyone else.
Lj A one in 10 chance, now that's funny. When was the last time you saw 10 applications for ANY controlled hunt? And please explain a non-resident's odds in units with less than 10 overall tags. Just a few years ago, there were leftover bull moose tags for a unit in Idaho...I think unit 17 up in the Selway. They obviously didn't last long when they were offered s first come first served...but there were just a few people that initially applied. There's also a fair number of tags in areas with mainly private land where less than 10 people put in. Most hunts with public access and optimal timing have thousands apply, but the less desirable hunts for relatively often have very few applicants.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,249
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,249 |
No matter how few the tags in any particular hunt, the non-res quota is as least 1. So, if there are 5 tags, 1 can go to a non-res. They put all the applications together in a digital hat and start drawing. When the 1st non-res is drawn, they bypass any others as the draw continues. If all 5 go to residents before a non-res is drawn, that's the way it goes.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 96
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 96 |
Actioning trophy tags is a slippery slope for fewer tags in all areas in the future. It can easily start with high trophy areas (like the Henry Mountains deer hunt in UT), then drift into other areas as the separation of wealth increases, while areas to hunt decreases. The government does not own wild game and should not be able to "sell" them
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,193
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,193 |
When there are 10 tags for a specific controlled hunt and 9 residents plus one non-resident apply for that hunt the non-resident has an one in 10 chance of drawing that tag, just like everyone else.
Lj A one in 10 chance, now that's funny. When was the last time you saw 10 applications for ANY controlled hunt? And please explain a non-resident's odds in units with less than 10 overall tags. Just a few years ago, there were leftover bull moose tags for a unit in Idaho...I think unit 17 up in the Selway. They obviously didn't last long when they were offered s first come first served...but there were just a few people that initially applied. There's also a fair number of tags in areas with mainly private land where less than 10 people put in. Most hunts with public access and optimal timing have thousands apply, but the less desirable hunts for relatively often have very few applicants. Holy $hit my grammar sucks. Rock Chuck is right...Up to 10% of tags for a given controlled hunt go to non-residents. If only residents are drawn when the allotted number of tags is reached, then none will go to non-residents.
|
|
|
|
|
158 members (2UP, 338reddog, 35, 44mc, 007FJ, 16 invisible),
1,501
guests, and
893
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,600
Posts18,454,582
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
