New rules ?

So what'd the rac meetings decide on for the new rules

>So what'd the rac meetings decide
>on for the new rules

If you're referring to the Preference Point System changes, all 5 RAC's passed them as presented by the DWR. I'm not sure what all the counts were, but the Southern RAC passed them 9 to 2. There was an amendment to the DWR proposal made by one of the Southern RAC members to consider ALL first choices while using and/or losing points with ALL 2nd through 5th choices drawn in order randomly without using and/or losing points, but it failed 6 to 5.

FWIW, the DWR presentation was supported by SFW, RMEF, MDF, and UBA.

Whether or not the Wildlife Board will also pass them as presented remains to be seen.

As some side notes, I asked about the recommendation made by the mule deer committee to consider combining the deer preference point system (General units) with the deer bonus point system (Limited Entry units) and was told that there are still discussions going on regarding that idea. I also asked about current 2nd and 3rd choices being different units or just different weapons for the same unit and was told that 90% of those choices were for different weapons for the same unit as the first choice. How these current changes would impact those two answers/scenarios is yet unknown, but we may find that anything passed now will be mote in a year or two. Are we having fun yet!!!

I've heard discussions about this topic but I don't know what the RAC approved proposal is.
Would someone please explain what the proposal is and how it differs from the current system.

Signed,
Confused Zeke

LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-16 AT 10:29PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Nov-19-16 AT 09:46?PM (MST)

>I've heard discussions about this topic
>but I don't know what
>the RAC approved proposal is.
>
>Would someone please explain what the
>proposal is and how it
>differs from the current system.
>
>
>Signed,
>Confused Zeke

Currently, the General Unit Deer hunts are on a preference point draw system which evaluates/draws permits for each group of point holders separately beginning with the highest point group and it goes completely through each group from their first choices through their fifth choices before moving to the next lower point holder group. AND it removes points from each applicant ONLY if they draw their first choice, but adds a new point if they draw any of the other choices.

The proposal would evaluate/draw permits for ALL first choices beginning with the highest point holder group and moving on down the list of groups BEFORE evaluating ALL the second choices, then ALL the third choices and so forth. However, the kicker for most objections is that, under this proposal, if you draw ANY permit, regardless of the choice, you also lose ALL your points.

Basically, one of the reasons this proposal happened is that the Wildlife Board asked the DWR to come up with a solution to a "loophole" that allowed applicants to make a first choice that they were sure they wouldn't draw (Plateau, Thousand Lakes) and a second/third/etc. choice (or choices) for the unit (or units) they really wanted, all the while keeping their current points and adding a new one each year, thus remaining in a highly successful top point group year after year.

Obviously, those applicants who knew about this "loophole" and played it aren't real happy about this proposal as presented and have tried to stop or change it at the RAC"s so that the "loophole" remains. We'll see how that works out at the Wildlife Board meeting on Dec 1st.

Edited: To be fair to the Wildlife Board and the DWR, this proposal isn't just about the so-called "loophole", but also addresses the fairness of evaluating everyone's first choice before issuing permits for second choices and so on. Plus, we must keep in mind that this proposal also applies to antlerless, crane, swan, and grouse hunts also.

Thanks for the follow-up

Robb

>
>
>Edited: To be fair to the
>Wildlife Board and the DWR,
>this proposal isn't just about
>the so-called "loophole", but also
>addresses the fairness of evaluating
>everyone's first choice before issuing
>permits for second choices and
>so on. Plus, we must
>keep in mind that this
>proposal also applies to antlerless,
>crane, swan, and grouse hunts
>also.

GS deer is the only drawing this problem has occurred with. Everything else, if you draw a tag at all, 2-5 choice, you lose your points

Thank you for the information

Heard the racs voted to give archery only permits. Another special interest splitting up the pie.

>Heard the racs voted to give
>archery only permits. Another
>special interest splitting up the
>pie.

I'm not sure where you got that idea, but I think you might have misunderstood the DWR proposal to add 7 days of archery only hunting to all current Once-in-a-Lifetime hunts. Those are not separate tags, just an archery extension of established hunts.

Buddy was at the meeting in springville and said sfw, uba, mdf proposed archery only tags on once in a lifetime hunts and the rac voted for the proposal. A wildlife board member also was pushing for archery only permits. Not just the seven day extension. The archery only permits have to come out of the current allotment of tags.

>Buddy was at the meeting in
>springville and said sfw, uba,
>mdf proposed archery only tags
>on once in a lifetime
>hunts and the rac voted
>for the proposal. A
>wildlife board member also was
>pushing for archery only permits.
> Not just the seven
>day extension. The archery
>only permits have to come
>out of the current allotment
>of tags.

Sorry, I was not aware of that. In any case, nothing like that passed in the Southern RAC.

Thanks Elkfromabove,

Through our discussions I assumed that the new proposal was similar to that.

It will be of little change to most but a big change to some.

Like every other change in the tag dispersal system, some will win and some will lose. There is no right answer.

Zeke

I like the Archery only tag on some of the OIL species.

Thanks for adding that into this thread 2-point.

Robb

I think the Seven day extension is great, But I don't support an archery only OIL permit. They can use archery equipment the whole hunt if the choose to. There isn't enough hunting pressure on the OIL permits to justify archery only tags.

+1 to what elkantlers said.

>I think the seven day extension
>is great, But I don't
>support an archery only OIL
>permit. They can use archery
>equipment the whole hunt if
>they choose to. There isn't
>enough hunting pressure on the
>OIL permits to justify archery
>only tags.

Bingo!

The proposal to add a new archery hunt to some OIL hunts was shot down at the NE rac, but they did approve the 7 day archery only extension to all current OIL permits.


Jake H. BIG BONE HUNTING Page on Facebook.

If they added an archery only tag wouldn't that help the draw? Maybe you could draw every 10 years once in a lifetime rather than 20?