Non-res application sticker shock

MuddyBoots · Mar 30, 2014

Just looked over the 2014 proclamation and if I'm reading it right it is now going to cost $220 to apply for sheep, moose, and goat. I liked it better when you ponied up the tag fee. Seriously considering if it is worth staying in the game or if I should just cut my losses now. This has already been quite the year for non-res applications...

earlyriser · Mar 30, 2014

I read that too. Any idea how many points moose, goat, bison and sheep took to draw last year? I've looked at MT game and fish site and the draw stats they post look the same for each species concerning points. I am sure I am reading them wrong though. I have been applying, just never really was concerned with # of points to draw each. Figured I'd be an old man before I did....Ha!

440sixpack · Mar 30, 2014

It's yet another hose job. my wife and I both have max points and I haven't decide if we should bail or not.

Max points today means very little, too many people have max points and they're bonus points not preference points anyway. the least they could do for this kind of coin is gauranteed NR hunters 10% of the tags.

The question is do you stay in a few years and see how many NR hunters bag it or just blow $220 a year until you get as smart as they were and bag it. I don't know.

Stay thirsty my friends

kilowatt · Mar 31, 2014

LAST EDITED ON Mar-31-14 AT 10:22AM (MST)[p]What is MAX this coming seasonly draw? If memory serves me right they started in 2001, is this correct?

When they started this BONUS POINT system, I called MT Hdqts for F&G and asked to talk to a supervisor about the system they started. I got some lady and I asked her number of questions and as I expected, don't get a straight answer out of her.

All double talk...so I told her I will not give you people $10 for a Point and even after a few years or even 10 years am not guaranteed to draw. She said the points system will help you draw and I told her not the way you are talking it won't.

So I sent in our app's and money for my buddy and myself and we both drew COMBO license/tags for Elk & Deer in 2001...WE HAD THE SAME TAGS THE YEAR BEFORE IN 2000. WE DID NOT BUY THAT POINT EITHER.

Brian
http://i44.tinypic.com/es7x8z.jpg[/IMG]

JRABQ · Mar 31, 2014

2001 sounds about right, I have 13 pts for sheep.

gznokes · Mar 31, 2014

Sticker shock is right!! I have quite a few points, but I don't think it makes sense to buy the bonus points. If I'm reading this correctly, in 2012, there were 6928 Non Res applicants who drew 19 tags. Those are horrific odds to be paying $70 to play.

http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/planahunt/drawingStatistics/sheep.html

Craig · Mar 31, 2014

I never expected to draw a sheep permit but for I was willing to play the game. Fronting the fee and the cheep cost to get a point was not bad. I have 6 points and Now I am out. Not going to pay $70 for 4,409 apps for 2 tags in 2012.

Plus it's up to 10% of the tags. Not 10% of the tags. Could be a chance where there are 0 tags given out.

DnkyPunch · Mar 31, 2014

I'll keep my change thank you very much. Just I like my health care and i heard i can keep that too.

gznokes · Mar 31, 2014

Will somebody check my math on this bc the more I look into it the more I can't see how it makes any mathematical sense to put in. I looked up the MT draw odds for 2012-- they had a hair under 7000 NR applicants for sheep who drew 19 tags. I understand the argument that you can't draw if you don't apply, but economically they are pricing those tags at $25000 each (7000 applicants x $70 app&pt fee=$490,000/19=$25000 per tag!!) my math is a little simplistic bc it doesn't take the squared pts into consideration, but regardless the odds are terrible and the price is the same as just going on a guided hunt!

440sixpack · Mar 31, 2014

I think you have it right, it's a suckers bet.

But that doesn't mean I won't do it, If I was 20 years younger I'm sure I'd do it.

Stay thirsty my friends

Bambistew · Apr 3, 2014

There was only 11 ram tags given out in 2012, a couple ewe tags and the rest were unlimited. About 7000 NR applicants.

Good luck

bowedark · Apr 7, 2014

So how many nonresidents in the last year have drawn a Moose sheep or goat tag?

Ram187 · Apr 7, 2014

You can bet not very many!

muleycrazytwo · Apr 16, 2014

It is a suckers bet. I called game and fish and the way they have it set we non-res will never get 10% because all of the units we are allowed to apply in except for 680-00 have only 1 possible tag. We are also have to compete against residents for that tag. For 680 there are 2 nr tags available. So you have to be the 1st nr drawn to get a tag. My odds with max points last year (12) were about 1/500. For the new guys with 0 or 1 point the odds are ridiculous. They range from roughly 1/55,000 to 1/110,000. Had I known this when I started I wouldn't have. I'm done as I don't expect to live another 500 years!

BuzzH · Apr 16, 2014

It is a suckers bet. I called game and fish and the way they have it set we non-res will never get 10% because all of the units we are allowed to apply in except for 680-00 have only 1 possible tag.

Nope...not true at all.

The way the NR allocation works in Montana for sheep, moose, and goat is that NR's are limited to "up to 10%" of the REGION quota. Its not based on individual hunting units.

As a hypothetical example, lets say the total number of permits issued in all the REGION 1 areas is 20 tags. NR's can draw up to a total of 2 sheep tags in Region 1. Meaning, that if an individual hunting unit in Region 1, gives out a total of 2 tags, both tags could go to NR hunters.

I've seen at least one instance that I recall, where NR's drew the ONLY 2 tags available in a hunting unit.

If someone at the F&G told you different, they dont understand their own drawing system.

Of course, its also possible that not a single NR sheep, goat, or moose tag will be issued as the law is "up to 10%", but doesnt ensure NR's a single tag.

abqbw · Apr 16, 2014

One slight correction. The quota is up to 10% per region, correct. But MT decides prior to the drawing exactly which hunting districts those up to 10% may be drawn in and how many NR permits may be drawn in each of those districts. Usually 1. Sometimes 2 in districts with tons of permits like 680. The nonresident then has to get lucky enough to draw a tag before the residents draw all of them in the districts that have a possible nonresident tag (or tags) in them.

The districts nonresidents can apply for are on your application. At the time you apply these are tentative. The final tag quantities are not set until after the application deadline. There may not actually be a NR tag allocated for every listed NR district when the drawing occurs. Once in awhile the total tag numbers will drop enough so less NR tags are available under the 10% regional quota and one of the districts that was on the NR application form will lose its nonresident quota of up to 1 (or 2 but I am not aware of a case of a district with an up to two NR quota having both erased). If you applied for that district, you were never in a drawing for a tag. No chance. Which is not that far off from the chance of drawing a tag anyway. It happened in 2012 for one of the region 1 districts. I can't remember which one. 502 NR applied in this district but were never in a drawing for a tag. I know. I was one of them.

I don't have a problem with MT's highly restrictive NR rules but it would be nice if they allowed you to have a "tentative" 2nd choice that only gets used if your 1st choice was properly selected from the list for NR applicants but the district ends up not having any "up to" NR tag quotas. There is no way for us to predict if a regional NR quota drops and that causes a tentative NR district to be dropped. They ought to let you be in a real drawing out of a sense of fairplay.

So, there are two reasons nonresidents may not draw tags in all of the districts listed for NR applicants. First, residents draw all the tags in the district before a NR gets lucky. I have no problem with that. Why should a resident that gets luckier in the drawing get booted for a nonresident that is less lucky? Second, you pick a district that at the time of the drawing does not have a quota of a NR tag.

All this information can be ascertained from the draw odds report. If you scan down the NR "quota" column and you see a quota of zero but there are a lot of NR that applied, that tells you there was never a chance for those NR but the district was listed for NR on the application form. Also, if you scan down the NR quota column and there were tags available but no nonresidents drew, that tells you that the residents drew all the tags in the district before a NR got lucky.

One thing you can be sure about, NR will not draw any more tags than listed in the NR quota for a given district. Say there is a regional NR quota of two tags, 1 each in two districts. They will never let two NR draw two tags in one of the districts. Once a district's nonresident quota is drawn, that district is done for NR. The other district may never yield a NR tag drawn.

abqbw · Apr 16, 2014

The District/Hunt from 2012 that was on the nonresident application but did not have any nonresident tags in the quota at the time of the drawing was 121-00. 502 applicants.

Going back to 2006, there are no cases where nonresidents drew 2 tags when the total quota for res/nonres was 2 tags. There are no cases where MT even set the nonresident quota as up to 2 tags if there were only two tags available in the hunt. Ram, either sex, or ewe. The lowest number of tags in a hunt where MT set the NR quota as up to 2 tags was 5 for ewe 7 for either sex/ram hunts since 2006.

BuzzH · Apr 16, 2014

LAST EDITED ON Apr-16-14 AT 09:45PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-16-14 AT 09:42?PM (MST)

You're wrong...and in wayyy over your head.

There was a 100 series unit that had a total of 2 tags and both went to NR's...probably prior to 2006, but definately since 2000.

I can tell you for 100% fact that in 2006 there were 4 tags issued for one hunting unit and 2 of those tags went to NR hunters.

I know and helped both of them (R. Smithson and B. Martin)...my Dad drew the same unit in 2005.

Also, there was a chance for a NR to draw the 121-00 tag in 2012, the region cap of "up to" 10% was reached before one of the 502 NR's that applied for 121 were selected. Or there is also the chance that the first names picked for unit 121 were all residents. But, a NR most certainly was in the running for a tag in 121...no question.

There were 36 total sheep tags issue for the 100 series (meaning up to 3 NR permits would be issued)...3 NR's drew, one in 122-00, one in 122-30, and one in 123-00.

There is NO NR UNIT QUOTAS...period.

abqbw · Apr 16, 2014

BuzzH-

I stated that I only looked back to 2006. I only have the draw stats available back to '06.

I am confident that I am correct about 2006. In 2006, disregarding unlimited units because everyone draws, there were 3 units where 2 nonresidents drew 2 tags (2 was the most NR drew in any unit, except unlimited units):
124-30, 18 Res and 2 NR drew, 20 permits total;
482-31, 3 Res and 2 NR drew, 5 permits total; and
680-30, 23 Res and 2 NR drew, 25 permits total.

The 2006 table is there. Please point out the unit with 4 tags and 2 NR drew. I don't see it.

Second, 2012. I might be wrong and if so thank you for pointing it out.

Since in 2012 there were 4 region 1 hunt codes on the application but they reduced the number of tags in the region from 42 to 36 (specifically 121-00 had 10 tentative tags in the 2012 Moose, Sheep, Goat Regulations and the final tag count was 4),the up to 10% regional rule limited the nonres tags to 3. We agree on that.

Now this is where I am now confused and maybe you can help out. Do they float the 3 tags among the 4 NR hunt codes that were on the NR application and award them in the 3 units were NR get lucky first and then put down a quota of 1 on the draw stats report after the NR got lucky in those 3 hunt codes? Then put a 0 in in they hunt code that didn't have a lucky NR applicant because the quota of 3 for the region was used up?

I always thought that the 0 for the NR quota in hunt code in 121-00 was a pre-draw quota and the hunt code was not available for a nonres. I see your point.

Happy Hunting and good luck in the draws.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos2/85032006_sheep_stats_(1)_page_1.jpg

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos2/25512006_sheep_stats_(1)_page_2.jpg

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos2/62022012_sheep_stats_(2)_page_1.jpg

http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos2/68922012_sheep_stats_(2)_page_2.jpg

abqbw · Apr 16, 2014

BussH,

I re-read your post, and you really are pretty much a dickhe@d anyway.....

But thanks for giving me something to look into.

Ivanab · Apr 17, 2014

I know this is mainly goat, sheep, and moose talk but the elk bow permits really tick me off as a non-resident. Last year for unit 900-15, they did not fill the non resident quota. Only 358 0f 619 nonresidents drew, which I don't have a problem with, but all 1501 of residents first choice drew, and then they took 1,828 residents second choice apps to fill the quota. So the residents can put in for a rifle tag first choice and a bow tag second choice and get a tag almost every year and still build up their bonus points. I don't think they should take residents second choice and sometimes third choice before giving any additional tags to the nonresidents.

BuzzH · Apr 17, 2014

abqbw,

You said, "Now this is where I am now confused and maybe you can help out. Do they float the 3 tags among the 4 NR hunt codes that were on the NR application and award them in the 3 units were NR get lucky first and then put down a quota of 1 on the draw stats report after the NR got lucky in those 3 hunt codes? Then put a 0 in in they hunt code that didn't have a lucky NR applicant because the quota of 3 for the region was used up?"

That is correct.

Keep in mind that the "quota" on NR's is UP TO 10% per region. Meaning that there is a possibility (although very remote), that not a single NR will ever draw.

As was the case in 2012, even though 121 was listed as a unit that NR's could potentially draw, either the region quota was met before a 121 applicant was picked, or 5 residents were drawn first in 121. However, those NR's that applied for 121 were in the draw and could have been issued a tag.

I'll be the first to agree with you that the MT system is pretty bad. I have no problem with being limited to 10% of the tags, BUT, NR's should be a guaranteed that 10%...not an "up to" situation.

What happens in the draw should be pointed out to NR's and the facts do matter. Its confusing enough without misinformation.

BTW, it was area 213 that the 2 NR's drew in 2006...and no, the draw stats will not reflect that. Still doesnt change the facts.

abqbw · Apr 17, 2014

Why would someone drawing not be in the stats? Are you saying the Drawing statistics report is incomplete?

Only 213 hunts in 2006 where:

213-00, 4 permits, 4 residents drew, 0 nonresidents drew.
213-30, 5 permits, 5 Residents drew, 0 nonresidents drew.

The Montana Nonresident Native program doesn't apply for sheep, right? Did it apply in 06?

BuzzH · Apr 17, 2014

LAST EDITED ON Apr-17-14 AT 11:37AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-17-14 AT 11:35?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Apr-17-14 AT 11:28?AM (MST)

abqbw,

Thats a legitimate question...and I'll answer it.

Yes, the drawing stats are incomplete...but I suspect (but dont know), you may find the truth in the harvest reports for unit 213 in 2006.

This is a case of why posted drawing stats are always suspect, as well as why its important to pay attention to details and the rules regarding the draws. The correct information is what matters for those that pay attention to, and expect FAIR and REASONABLE levels of how they're treated as NR hunters. You have to understand the process...I probably spend wayyyy too much time doing just that. But, IMO, its paid off for me knowing how these systems "work".

In 2006, after the initial draw, there was an "unnamed" source that pointed out that Montana had jacked up the NR draw. Through region wide "rounding", to determine the number of available NR tags, it was found that NR's were cheated out of 2 sheep permits (I believe in 2005).

They drew another 2 tags, (again I believe from 2005 applicants), and both of the names drawn had applied for 213 (in 2005) for their first choice. Both were issued permits, that clearly ARE NOT listed in the draw statistics.

Why that is...I have no idea, but all I can tell you is that they arent listed, just as you pointed out. When I heard about this whole thing, I was pretty interested since my Dad had drawn 213 in 2005 (as a Resident) and both my wife and I applied as NR's for 213 in 2005 as well. I did some research and got an "answer" as to why 2 NR's drew in 2006 when it wasnt even listed as an open unit for NR's that year.

But, like I said, its 100% fact that 2 NR's drew that area in 2006 as I shared information with both about the area. Both of their stories were published in a hunting rag and both took B&C rams.

Thats what I KNOW.

Its also why I think MT should jump on board with the rest of the states and issue a straight up guaranteed 10% of the tags. The system they have in place now only causes confusion (understandable), and really has the potential to kick NR's in the teeth.

Now with the application/point fees increasing, NR's should be assured that they have 10% of the tags assured to them.

Just my opinion...

BuzzH · Apr 17, 2014

LAST EDITED ON Apr-17-14 AT 11:48AM (MST)[p]Forgot to add...

I never got an answer to what pool of 2005 NR applicants they used to draw the additional permits.

I dont know if it was from ALL NR sheep applicants, or if it was from just those NR's that applied for Region 2 areas in 2005, or specifially the NR applicant pool for 213 that applied in 2005.

Again, I suspect it was probably the region 2 specific NR applicants, but I cant know that for sure.

abqbw · Apr 17, 2014

Turns out I was 100% correct about the 2012 draw with respect to the 502 nonresidents in 121-00 that had absolutely no chance of drawing. I just got off the phone with Neil Whitney at MT FWP. He runs the drawing. He is not a customer service agent that might not understand the drawing process. Mr. Whitney said that PRIOR to running the drawing the tentative NR tag in 121-00 was eliminated to meet the region 1 10% max quota.

502? nonresidents that applied in 121-00 in 2012 had absolutely zero chance of drawing.

Perhaps I am not the one in waaaaay over my head. That was a rude and condescending remark but since it came from an apparent idiot I forgive you.

abqbw · Apr 17, 2014

It's pretty disingenuous to say I'm in waaaay over my head for not knowing about tags handed out outside the draw to correct a prior year error... Jesus. I don't know secret information and that makes me wrong. You are just a real jerk. Small man. Always gotta be right.

BuzzH · Apr 17, 2014

About as disingenious as believing a MTFWP employee that doesnt even know the rules of the drawing he conducts every year. Exactly why he had his arse handed to him in 2006.

Sounds like the "facts" you were given may result in another sheep tag or two this year. I'll let you know.

...and thats not the only incident regarding a major f-up by the MTFWP drawing coordinator.

Got another one, equally as bad as the 2005-2006 ordeal. Resulted in additional LQ deer and elk tags.

I guess maybe a better way to put it, since I didnt know you were so sensitive and chicken skinned...with the MTFWP running the draw, we're all in over our heads, including the MTFWP.

abqbw · Apr 18, 2014

Buzz.
You are a piece of work.

Because I have figured out by now what type of a man you are from your posts, I was sure when I posted the latest that you would deny the truth and continue with your fantastical compulsion to be perceived as correct and the smartest guy in the room. I was really looking forward to what sort of fantasy you would come up with, but couldn't figure what it would be. You exceeded my expectations! This might be your best yet. Even the official that runs the draw knows less than you. That's a good one, even for you.

There is nothing wrong with being wrong and making mistakes. Not being able to admit when you are wrong is a different matter. It speaks to a lack of character at best. At worst, a personality disorder and mental health issues. I think you are probably just a jerk but you might actually be sick.

If you stated a scarf was blue and it was actually orange and someone told you, you would deny its orange. I can hear it. "Well in the right wavelength of light the colors change, I know for a fact that is was blue in India before some idiot at the textile factory put it in the wrong dye vat, when you expose it to X-rays it changes colors, well that's a fishing scarf and to fish it appears blue", it's only orange as a temporary color phase. It will change to blue when exposed to sunlight for three years. I was talking about the final color, you big dummy".

It's awesome.

BuzzH · Apr 18, 2014

abqbw,

First of all, I'm a huge fan of every state keeping a majority of tags for their Resident hunters. However, as a NR, I have an expectation of a fair draw, based on the rules established via the game agencies

Secondly, if what you're telling me is truthful, then I believe there is a solid case for 502 NR applicants that applied in 2012 to have another shot at a sheep tag. They were ripped off by the drawing coordinator.

Heres the facts as I understand them regarding the MT draw...please feel free to correct me where I'm wrong.

1. NR's are limited to applying in pre-determined units, not all of the units.

2. NR permits are limited to UP TO 10% of the REGION wide quota, not 10% of the unit wide quota.

Assuming nothing is wrong so far...lets take a look at the 2012 drawing regarding REGION 1 sheep tags.

There were a total of 36 sheep tags issued. Assuming that the quota is "rounded down" to 3...NR applicants were limited to "up to" 3 total tags for region 1 areas.

So, continuing to follow along...there were 3 ram units that NR's could apply for 121 (quota of 4 tags, 502 applicants), 122 (quota of 6 and 620 applicants), 123 (quota of 4 180 applicants) and finally there was 1 area that was open to a NR ewe permit 122-30 (quota of 8 with 2 NR applicants first choice).

Just like you stated, there were 3 NR tags drawn (that qualifies for the "up to" 10%) of the quota 1 tag in each of units 122, 123, and ewe tag in 122-30.

So far everything is on the level.

Heres the problem, when did "Mr. Whitney" decide to arbitrarily take 502 region 1 applicants out of the drawing that applied in good faith?

Also, how does the draw coordinator decide which unit to remove "prior" to the draw? What criteria is used to determine it? Cant be unit specific quota based...as there were 4 tags in both units 121 and 123. Cant be the unit with the least number of applicants as 122-30 only had 2 applicants and 123 had only 180.

This whole situation isnt adding up and it really comes down to a couple situations.

Either you have your wires crossed and arent being truthful about what Mr. Whitney told you...or 502 NR hunters deserve a damn good explaination on why they were arbitrarily removed from the sheep NR sheep draw in 2012.

Either way, I'm going to get to the bottom of it.

abqbw · Apr 18, 2014

Thank you for your post. I am in total agrrement. I apologize for being an a$$. Sincerely.

My underestanding is that Neil does not decide. He is told where to short the tag and plugs it into the system and makes it run as instructed. He is the technical expert that implements the wishes of the policy makers. Don't blame him. He only pulls the switch on the gallows....

In Neil's defense, I called yesterday morning and left a voice message. He called back at 4:40 pm same day. The impression I got was he went out of his way to call a nonresident back on the same day I left a messege. Would that all goverment employyess be so concientous....

It is a pretty rotten deal for NR but it complies with state law and doubt they have to change the methodology.

I see two possible solutions.

1) Let nonresidents have a back-up second either sex/ram choice that is only evaluated if the "tentative" quota for the hunt code at the time they applied in the hunt code they selected is "erased" when the "final" quotas are established.

2) Float the permits available to nonresidents in a region with more hunt codes available on the applications than there are available permits and assign which hunt codes end up with a nonresident permit based on where nonresidents get lucky first.

I mean, MTs nonresident restrictions are onerous enough that they could add a little flexibilty. The law is "up to" 10% and we are getting 5% or 6%. Seems like it would be fair to set it up so we end up with 7% or 8%....We do send a lot of money their way, and quite a bit more this year.

As a resident of New Mexico I admire that Montana goes out of its way to puch the limits of the law to the benefit of its residents. In New Mexcio they do the opposite sometimes. By our quota law there should never be a nonresident or outfitted tag issued in a hunt code if there are less than 7 permits total. That is because 7 is the first number where residents can be awarded a minimum of 84% of permits without being awarded all the permits. 6 x .84 = 5.04, rounds down to 5, but 5/6=83.33%, short of the 84% minimum. 7 x .84 = 5.88, rounds up to 6. 6/7=85.7%, leaving a tag for nonres/outfitted. Furthermore, in every instance I can find our department awards any and all tags in a toss-up between the nonresident unguided pool and the outfitted pool to the outfitted pool.

Apparantly, our Department doesn't just "allow" permits in below 7 permit codes to be awarded to nonresidents/outfitted applicants, it causes them to be. I strongly suspect that they are taking permits away from residents and reserving them for nonres/outfitted. There is no basis in the statute to do this and it is in fact contrary to the statute.

This is based on the fact that there are just too many examples in our draw reports where a nonresident/outfitted are awarded tags in the below 7 permit hunt codes when the statistical probability predicts all residents would have drawn before an nonres/outfitted applicant would have drawn. The are jiggering the draw so nonresidents/outfitted applicants have better odds than residents. No state does that.

BuzzH · Apr 18, 2014

abqbw,

Thick skin here...no worries.

Now we're loggin'....

The two huge questions now, is who is telling Neil what units (the few there are) to remove from the draw. And further, why are they "shorting" any specific unit a tag? What law or authority do "they" have to decide what units to drop?

It still doesnt make sense that they would remove ANY of the NR open units prior to the draw. With the imposed limit of "up to 10%" why would it matter which units, within the Region wide quota, the "up to 10%" came from?

Finally, if there is a Montana "law" regarding this, then surely NR's should be able to get their hands on a copy. I'll file a FOIA request if I have to.

The other option that you left out is for Montana to simply issue a flat 10% of tags to NR's. Drop the "up to" nonsense and let hunters know aheaad of time which units will have tags available to them.

Also, I believe that if MT dropped 502 applicants from unit 121, those NR's should, at the very least, be refunded their FULL application fees. This is no different than the recent NM NR debacle...the State of Montana didnt allow them even a chance at a tag, they removed them. The better option is to draw one more sheep applicant from the 502 NR hunters that got the shaft in 2012.

I'm going to get the answers, as I believe there is an obligation from MT that NR's should not only be treated fairly in the draw, but they also provide full disclosure to how the draw is conducted and rules regarding same.

I smell another sheep tag for someone that applied in 121 in 2012...and NO I didnt apply there. I applied in 122.

BuzzH · Apr 18, 2014

LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-14 AT 01:48PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-14 AT 01:45?PM (MST)

abqbw,

Digging a little deeper, I was able to find this, which again, if true, is an even bigger mystery as to WHY 502 applicants that applied in 121 were taken out of the draw. In particular when 121 should have been (if we believe what I found on the MT draw), that they start with the lowest numbered units first.

However, it now makes sense and could explain, IF Mr. Whitney was telling you the truth, about why no NR's drew 121. That unit should have been the first one drawn, and the ONLY way a NR didnt get issued a tag is either if the applications were purged from the system, or the first 4 tags drawn were all residents.

Drawing Process: FWP's special drawings are computerized
and completely random. A computer assigns each application a
randomly selected number. In other words, the computer
randomly draws assigned numbers, not applicant names.

Drawings are conducted species by species, hunting district by hunting district. For example, when conducting the drawing for permits, the computer starts with the first elk hunting
district: 100-00. If the quota is 10, the computer starts selecting applicants who applied for this district as their first choice. If there are at least 1 first choice applicants, the drawing does not consider second choice applicants. When that district quota has been filled, the computer goes to the next hunting district and completes the same process until all district quotas are filled with first choice applicants. If there are not enough first choice applicants to fill a quota, the computer starts selecting second choice applicants, and so forth.

This still raises a red flag as to HOW exactly, and WHO gets to make the call on withdrawing units (if thats what really happened) and entire pools of applicants that applied in good faith with an expectation of, at the very least, being considered and active in the draw.

Further, if they draw as described above, starting with the lOWEST numbered districts first, it sure seems to me that there will be a huge bias in the draw, favoring those NR's that apply for the lowest numbered district.

This whole thing is an absolute goat-rope...figured I'd take the weekend and keep digging up research before I open a can of whoop-ass Monday on the MTFWP.

muleycrazytwo · Apr 18, 2014

Now your talking! I to believe they are at the very least deceiving NR's and probably not following the law if there is one.

abqbw · Apr 19, 2014

Buzz,
I always thought they ran the draw by random number of the applicants. They go through the random numbers from lowest to highest and when your number comes up, if a permit is still available it is awarded to you. Once all the permits are gone, draw is over. I can't speak to the scenario you describe because I have no idea about that draw method.

The one thing I am satisfied about is that MT decides where to plug in the nonresident permits by HD and Region before the drawing is run. I had looked into it several years ago and understood that an HD may specifically be dropped as a possible nonresident district after applications are in but prior to the draw. I confirmed that what I believed was correct this week by calling FWP and talking to Neil Whitney.

The way their quota law reads I believe they are perfectly within their rights and in compliance with law to do what they are doing. It isn't very friendly but I'm afraid we are stuck with it. I like it no more than you do.....

schmalts · Apr 21, 2014

___what I do know is this. Nonresidents make up roughly half of the total applications for the big 3 but are limited to a max of 10% of tags. That means that you have 500% less odds than resident. So look at the odds posted in the big 3 booklet with a grain of salt. With the new fees your better off staying out if you not invested in a lot of points. Just my opinion___________________________
http://www.predatoroptics.com
Predator Optics webstore

huntin50 · Apr 21, 2014

I agree. I'm glad I lucked out and drew a MT sheep tag. Very slim odds, now it's expensive very slim odds. My boy has points, but we are done. A friend has max points and may continue for a couple years. I hope MT DWR loose a lot of NR money, or change things so 10% of tags are available to NR.

wymoosehunter · Apr 25, 2014

I had not followed this thread until tonight and saw the squabble between Buzz and alphabet (just kidding-I can't remember your handle). Anyway, you were rehashing 2006. I sent a letter to MT G&F in April 2006 stating that their 2004 NR issuance seemed to be centered on a 10% total, then 2005 it went to a different standard like mentioned before. More importantly, I wrote about the sheep tag allocation in 2005. Below is a portion of what I wrote. Of course, they would not respond in writing. Funny how I drew a moose tag that year. I wish I could have found another "anomaly" the next year-I could have drawn a sheep tag in 2007.
Here is a portion of what I wrote to MT G&F with a cc to the AG's office:
A review of the 2004 special drawings for Bighorn Sheep (ram only) revealed that 8 nonresident licenses were issued in comparison to the 109 licenses issued to residents (7.3% ratio). The 2005 special drawings for sheep show that while the total number of ram licenses increased by 15 licenses to 124 ram licenses, the total nonresident licenses was reduced to 3 ram licenses. The percentage of nonresident licenses as compared to resident licenses was 2.4% for 2005.
Further review of the 2005 drawing statistics revealed that only 2 of 11 ram units listed on the application form as open to nonresidents had actual allocations for nonresidents. Additionally, unit 124-00 was not listed as ?open? to nonresidents, yet an allocation of 1 nonresident license was made for that unit.

abqbw · Apr 30, 2014

I had heard that there was a permit issued in the not too distant past that went to a nonresident. That must have been it.

I think that MT can award very few NR sheep permits and comply with their quota rules. If residents draw all the permits before nonresidents in hunt codes that nonresidents applied for and there is a nonresident quota it's just too bad for nonresidents. There usually are situations each year where this happens.