South Dakota West River Special Buck Tag

another state that is raising their fees.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
The outfitters are pushing for the increased number of special tags. One outfitter even voiced to the commission that an increase in tags would help his hunters come back every year! He even suggested to make up the difference by reducing the tags avail in the regular draw! There were 500 res applicants for 500 res tags last year and 803 nr applicants for 500 nr tags. I really don't see a need for more tags when the nr is guaranteed to draw at least every other year already. Not too many states with odds like those.

There is also some proposed legislation introduced to allow landowners to transfer (give or sell) their LO preference tags.

I sure hope the commission and legislature kill both of these.
These are going in the same direction as NM and we all know the problems they are now faced with.
 
In my comments to SDGFP I had no real problem with the 100 tag increase, rather the $100. If the hunting shows would just stay out it would not be a problem. Transferrable LO would be a disaster.....and I would be a non resident that would be able to get one for free (as my cousins still ranch our ggrandfathers 4000 acres).
 
Delmag
I can understand that you want to hunt the old homeplace, but as a resident I am very opposed to the Special Buck license program. It's only real purpose is to satisfy outfitters. It is the outfitters that are currently requesting more tags (not the resident hunters). The outfitters want to see their clients come back every year. Little do they realize is that if they increase the number of tags available for NR's it will it will also entice others to become outfitters and have their clients compete for those tags.

I really don't see a need to increase the number of tags available. Currently a NR is guarranteed to get a license AT LEAST every other year if they only app;y for the special buck tag. Under the current process even if they don't draw in the Special drawing they can turn around and apply again in the regular drawing. Thus if they play the system right they can actually hunt AT LEAST 2 out of every 3 years. What other state are you guaranteed to get a tag in any unit of your choice that often?

The GFP at the request of outfitters increased the tags from 400 to 500 in 2006. With the current proposed 100 tag increase would result in a 50% increase in only 6 years. I know the tags available in the general draw didn't increase anywhere near those rates!!!

I also know these tags are issued with no regards to game management. The GFP staff even confirmed this at the last meeting. They say that the few number of tags issued compared to the overal total gets so dispersed that they really don't have any impact on specific unit management. I dissagree with that assesment. I have checked the special buck harvest stats for the county where we hunt, and guess what, they account for over 8% of the total number of bucks havested in that county. I'm sure the number would be higher if they isolated it down to the specific unit/area where we hunt.

As for the tag price of $600. Wyoming is about the same price for their special tags with tough odds for good units, plus you have to pay $40 per year to build points for better units. Other states' tags are a little cheaper but you also have to add in some high annual upfront license costs every year for mulitple years to build points before drawing.

I plan to at least send an email to the commission voicing my concerns against this proposal. I hope to be able to drive the 4 hours to Pierre and speak to them in person.
 
I don't see a problem with that that increase,if a land owner has the game why not let him sell the hunt's to a resident or non resident.
 
SDBugler,

I am open to whatever happens, as I agree that it is an easy to draw tag +/- every other year. I just get tired of the SDGFP always putting $ in front of wildlife, ie antelope tags with multiple doe/kid tags included as the herd has been decimated over the last few years.

I here you on the $, my home state is around $550 total for a deer tag.

I would live in SD/WY if I could make a comparable living. Good luck in the WY elk draw
 
I agree with you. ALL the states are overpricing their tags, but I guess us sportsmen are still obsessed enough to keep going back. I also agree with you on the double tag issue. Almost every rifle buck license opportunity here in SD requries the applicant to purchase a double or triple tag that includes antlerless deer. I haven't shot a doe since I was 12 years old (34 years ago) and I have no desire to shoot one. however, I have to pay the extra fee for a double or triple tag. Makes no sense other than to fill the GFP coffers.

By the way are you originally from SD? Or just family ties? Where is the family homestead located?
 
>The outfitters are pushing for the
>increased number of special tags.
> One outfitter even voiced
>to the commission that an
>increase in tags would help
>his hunters come back every
>year! He even suggested
>to make up the difference
>by reducing the tags avail
>in the regular draw!
>There were 500 res applicants
>for 500 res tags last
>year and 803 nr applicants
>for 500 nr tags.
>I really don't see a
>need for more tags when
>the nr is guaranteed to
>draw at least every other
>year already. Not too
>many states with odds like
>those.
>
>There is also some proposed legislation
>introduced to allow landowners to
>transfer (give or sell) their
>LO preference tags.
>
>I sure hope the commission and
>legislature kill both of these.
>
>These are going in the same
>direction as NM and we
>all know the problems they
>are now faced with.



I was wondering if you have any names of the outfitters you are speaking of and did you witness this your self? I am a outfitter and see no need to raise the number of either.
 
Dakota
Here are two copied directly from the GFP notes from the last Commission meeting.........

Marvin Jobgen of Dakota Safaris in western South Dakota asked that the Commission increase the number of West River Nonresident Special Buck Tags by 250; currently the 500 licenses are not sufficient to cover the number of applicants and hunting business are not able to accommodate repeat customers that are an important part of their clientele

Philip Wilson president of Dakota Trophy out of Elm Springs near Wasta also asked consideration to increase special buck tags and then reduce the number of regular licenses by a similar amount to make the additional licenses less of a hardship


You can also listen to the audio recording of the last mtg.
 
DoeNob
I am a rifle and bow hunter. This propsoal impacts bowhunters indirectly. As more special tags become available it will encorage more people to get into the outfitting industry or landowenrs to charge tresspass fees rather than letting friends and family hunt. This will in turn tie up more and more private land and push more and more people onto the limited public land. This is already happening and this will only help accelrate the issue.

I have been rifle and archery hunting here for over 35 years. The number of hunter on public land has grown exponentially over the years and the number and quality of deer on public land is a fraction of what it used to be.
 
>Dakota
>Here are two copied directly from
>the GFP notes from the
>last Commission meeting.........
>
>Marvin Jobgen of Dakota Safaris in
>western South Dakota asked that
>the Commission increase the number
>of West River Nonresident Special
>Buck Tags by 250; currently
>the 500 licenses are not
>sufficient to cover the number
>of applicants and hunting business
>are not able to accommodate
>repeat customers that are an
>important part of their clientele
>
>
>Philip Wilson president of Dakota Trophy
>out of Elm Springs near
>Wasta also asked consideration to
>increase special buck tags and
>then reduce the number of
>regular licenses by a similar
>amount to make the additional
>licenses less of a hardship
>
>
>
>You can also listen to the
>audio recording of the last
>mtg.



Where might I find that audio recording? Much appreciated.
 
+1 for SDBugler

In addition, there are a finite number of deer in any state. There had been some die offs this winter according to people I know out there (EHD?), and there has been on/off over my lifetime. There are a lot of tags in the "regular" South Dakota system already! Hunting every other year as a NR is a hell of a lot better than most states!
 
264

This issue is NOT about landowner rights. For me it is about license demand, fair license opportunity, and issuing tags without any regard to unit herd management.
Also, I have nothing against outfitters, but I don't think we should be pimping the public?s wildlife to support a few select hunters and private businesses. A good business person would have researched supply, demand, and available resources before going into business and would have known the parameters before starting.

I am currently putting together some stats for my comments to the commission. But currently the special buck tag is one of the easiest buck tags to draw for both R & NR. Many of the regular tags have odds of only 20%-30% for nonresidents while the special buck tags have odds of 62%. Where is the real demand & need here? If we really need to increase the number of tags then lets increase them in the right area!!

These special buck tags as well as LOL?s are issued without any management basis. The GFP staff even admits this fact. They state that there are very few tags and that they get spread out throughout the entire western half of the state and therefore don't have a significant impact on specific unit herd harvest. However, when you combine the harvest from both of these licenses I think they do have an impact on some specific units. I did a calculation of one area and these two tags resulted in approximately 17% of the bucks harvested. I think that is significant enough to justify consideration. Also when you add in the youth, archery, and muzzy tags that are non-unit specific, these tags start to really impact the harvest in popular areas. Some popular areas are really getting hammered with all of these non-unit specific hunts. I'm not suggesting that all of these tags need to change to unit specific licenses, but rather that they be considered a little more closely to see the real impact.

Yes I know we are only talking about adding 200 tags, which is a very small number for the entire western half of the state. However, keep in mind that these tags are issued with no regard to herd management and so they wouldn't be cut in the future if herd numbers decline like the regular tags would be. Also, keep in mind that once this is established it will be very hard to get it reduced or eliminated in the future.
 
I agree,I think every ranch or area should be evaluated.This would solve a lot of problems down the road.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG.3.jpg
20191021_130104.jpg
IMG_20160301_230755.jpg
306508E7-3A5B-4EF4-9E52-C0F20D248DDF.jpeg
58945693-DFD8-4431-A431-38F38CD95096.jpeg
IMG_4436.JPG
07289355-FA6C-4CFF-A900-22F6F9C43A10.jpeg
BBB4F894-44DA-437D-8CC9-8A6CA920036D.jpeg
IMG_1920.jpeg
EE2728A6-C836-40AE-B80E-21A6C9EF1754.jpeg
996680_762406477107284_1047431604_n.jpg
Montanaelk2010.jpg
Back
Top Bottom