Revised Controlled Hunt Wait Periods - IDFG July 7 Meeting

D

DownThePipe

Active Member
Messages
233
LAST EDITED ON Jul-06-16 AT 02:19PM (MST)[p]The Commission is meeting in Jerome July 6-7. Agenda: https://idfg.idaho.gov/blog/2016/06/july-2016-commission-meeting-agenda

On July 7 at 10:30 there is discussion / decision item and staff recommendation is to adopt 2 year waiting periods for folks that have drawn antlered deer or elk tags before they can apply again. http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public...riod.pdf?_ga=1.36113248.1504034783.1440084209

I support the idea even though I assume the odds are not changed much. I do however think either-sex any weapon pronghorn should be included and currently it is not.
 
Yeah, I'd even like to see 2 OR 3 year wait on hard-to-draw quality tags. Right now, people just go from antlered to either sex the next year, and back to antlered again. Not much change at all.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-06-16 AT 05:25PM (MST)[p]I will be the first to say I am no expert statistician, however let's take a look at the odds under a proposed 2 year wait period to see what it would do to increase odds in highly sought after hunts. Take 45 rifle deer, there are 50 tags and 1685 total applications for those 50 tags in 2016- draw odds of 2.96%. Just doing the simple math and remove the 50 that draw this year for 2 years and then the 50 that draw next year for two years and so forth, roughly a rolling 100 people who drew wouldn't be able to put in each year after the two year waiting period ramps up. So instead of 1685 applicants, there would be at best 1585 after two years, rough draw odds of 3.15%- that is not counting for new hunters entering,or shifting their draw choices.Maybe my math is wrong but an increase of.19% doesnt seem like something to get too excited about...(I know the numbers might be better in other units I was just using 45 as an example.)

I'm not against longer waiting periods-just think the overall impact to draw odds is minimal.
 
I would be opposed to an extention of the waiting period. Currently there is a one year waiting period on antlered deer and elk after successfully drawing a tag. Remember our system is a true lottery. Everyone has the same odds of drawing a tag and if Lady Luck decides to smile on someone, more power to them! Why penalize someone for being lucky? I do my research and do what I can to increase my odds by putting in for tags that give me a slightly better draw percentage. There is no guarantee and I know that going into the draw. I would tell the commissioners....If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
 
I would also be opposed to any changes to the current system. It is by far the best draw system in the west. The increased draw odds would be so minimal as previously pointed out that it's not worth it. Everyone would actually have better odds of drawing more tags over a long period of time if there was no waiting period at all so that your names in the hat every year.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-07-16 AT 10:56AM (MST)[p]Increased waiting periods will not effect the odds much at all, as has been stated. What it does do is address the PERCEPTION of "fairness" issue that arises when some lucky applicants seem to always be drawing a tag, while others never seem to draw anything. I support increasing the waiting periods, one can always apply for another species or Sheep, Goat, Moose while in a waiting period.
 
So the "lucky" hunters who seem to always draw will draw every two years instead of every other. I know a guy who has drawn a premium deer tag 3 times in the last 10 years and a super tag or two.... Meanwhile I know people that haven't drawn anything in that same span - but they are applying for tags with 5% or worse draw odds. Idaho's system works, ask the vast majority of hunters from states with bonus points etc the random drawing is the most "fair" top to bottom. Increased waiting periods will do little to impact draw odds or "fairness". Just my two cents...
 
I wish Idaho would quit screwing around and go to a system similar to Nevada. Everyone still has a chance to draw and those who diligently apply year after year slowly gain more tickets in the hat. The points fans get a slice, the random fans get a slice and the state could rake in more cash. Not everyone gets exactly what they want, but all get some. What's not to like.
 
>I wish Idaho would quit screwing
>around and go to a
>system similar to Nevada. Everyone
>still has a chance to
>draw and those who diligently
>apply year after year slowly
>gain more tickets in the
>hat. The points fans get
>a slice, the random fans
>get a slice and the
>state could rake in more
>cash. Not everyone gets exactly
>what they want, but all
>get some. What's not to
>like.

So if i'm a resident of Nevada,and i don't draw can i still buy an O.T.C. deer and elk tag? I don't think so. Idaho no doubt has the best and "FAIREST" system. Everyone has an equal chance,and if you don't draw, there are tons of opportunity to just buy a tag and chances are you will fill it. It's my opinion that the majority of people that want to change the system are non residents!!
 
I left out a very important word in my post. Longer waiting periods will address the PERCEPTION of fairness. What possible down side would there be to increase the waiting period from 1 to 2 years.

Furthermore, there should be waiting periods for Antelope and Bear too, as it is harder to draw either of those than most moose hunts in Idaho.
 
Brdhunter, Idaho has draw tags and over the counter tags. So changing the draw portion of the system would have no effect on you getting an over the counter tag. I don't want to waste time stirring the pot because I'm sure it won't go anywhere, but just saying there are those who like random and those who like the idea of gaining a point. Maybe I'm crazy, but that seems like a pretty fair system to me. Atleast gives the poor unlucky SOB's a chance.
 
I think this will do more bad then good. Most guys I know go with the strategy of put in for deer,elk and antelope then once you draw put in for either sex or a trophy species. With how few of trophy species tags there are and same with either sex I think those odds would plummet.
 
>Brdhunter, Idaho has draw tags and
>over the counter tags. So
>changing the draw portion of
>the system would have no
>effect on you getting an
>over the counter tag. I
>don't want to waste time
>stirring the pot because I'm
>sure it won't go anywhere,
>but just saying there are
>those who like random and
>those who like the idea
>of gaining a point. Maybe
>I'm crazy, but that seems
>like a pretty fair system
>to me. Atleast gives the
>poor unlucky SOB's a chance.
>

So instead of saying be like Nevada you are saying be like Washington, same bonus point system as Nevada with OTC tags, anybody from Washington wanna chime in here about how great their system is. That is sarcasm of course because the draw odds for the highest point holders even after 20+ years are still less than 1% on any of the premium tags
 
>>Brdhunter, Idaho has draw tags and
>>over the counter tags. So
>>changing the draw portion of
>>the system would have no
>>effect on you getting an
>>over the counter tag. I
>>don't want to waste time
>>stirring the pot because I'm
>>sure it won't go anywhere,
>>but just saying there are
>>those who like random and
>>those who like the idea
>>of gaining a point. Maybe
>>I'm crazy, but that seems
>>like a pretty fair system
>>to me. Atleast gives the
>>poor unlucky SOB's a chance.
>>
>
>So instead of saying be like
>Nevada you are saying be
>like Washington, same bonus point
>system as Nevada with OTC
>tags, anybody from Washington wanna
>chime in here about how
>great their system is. That
>is sarcasm of course because
>the draw odds for the
>highest point holders even after
>20+ years are still less
>than 1% on any of
>the premium tags


Is Washington that bad because the system is bad or because the state has 5-6 times more population? Honest question.
 
^^^ you would be correct sir^^^ 5 times more people, much fewer draw units, and way less decent oppurtunity than Idaho. Idaho with a similar system would be nothing like Washington.
 
>Brdhunter, Idaho has draw tags and
>over the counter tags. So
>changing the draw portion of
>the system would have no
>effect on you getting an
>over the counter tag. I
>don't want to waste time
>stirring the pot because I'm
>sure it won't go anywhere,
>but just saying there are
>those who like random and
>those who like the idea
>of gaining a point. Maybe
>I'm crazy, but that seems
>like a pretty fair system
>to me. Atleast gives the
>poor unlucky SOB's a chance.
>
And the majority of Idaho residents like it the way it is. And the poor unlucky SOB has the same chance as everyone else! I'm not buying your'e sad story!!
 
>^^^ you would be correct sir^^^
>5 times more people, much
>fewer draw units, and way
>less decent oppurtunity than Idaho.
>Idaho with a similar system
>would be nothing like Washington.
>
Or Nevada


Justin
 
It is why many of us have drawn so many OIL trophy species tags (sheep, goat, moose)...we're limited to one tag.

LOVE THE SYSTEM.....
 
It's all math and relatively simple I believe.

The key is the relationship between the number of people applying relative to the numberr of tags.

I drew elk last year ,so I applied for Sheep this year. My buddy drew 44 bucks then went to an either sex archerry tag. If you desire to hunt your going to apply. Less and less people are content to only buy OTC.

You really want to change odd's then you have to change the desire for people to apply, The only ways I can think of that are to:

1. Make applying more expensive, by a notable amount.
2. Limit people to only one species per year, period.
3. Go back an raise the age limit for youth hunters.
4. Make the price of the actual tags moe expensive, by a notable amount, or make their price relative to the demand for the tag.

I'm not advocating any of these just discussing the few ways I can think of to either truly limit applicants or dissuade those that are marginally motivated to apply. Reality is any increase in draw odd's is likely to attract someone else I'm not thinking of.

Again it's all simple math and the law of supply and demand.
 
BPK,

You pretty much nailed it. Anything that is done to significantly increase the cost of entry or dissuade a big enough segment from not applying can carry consequences that can cause unintended problems down the road. Applying for 1 species a year "might" have the biggest impact on odds for resident applicants in ID.
 
>^^^ you would be correct sir^^^
>5 times more people, much
>fewer draw units, and way
>less decent oppurtunity than Idaho.
>Idaho with a similar system
>would be nothing like Washington.
>

And I would bet the same number of hunters buying a license and applying in the draws each year. And to say that Washington offers way less opportunity is also wrong, they may not have the trophy potential that Idaho does but there are a few highly sought after draw tags and many others that vary in draw odds from nearly guaranteed to 1 in 50 type odds, for comparison Idaho has a few highly sought tags and others run the gamut from nearly guaranteed to 1 in 25 type odds. I don't know a lot about Nevadas system but I would venture a guess that the reason draw odds are so good on many tags down there has to do with the fact you can't buy an over the counter tag and I imagine they still have their nearly impossible draws
 
IDFG - your survey is flawed.

Your statistics assume that the extended wait time will not influence application choices. Hunters may (and likely will) revise their controlled hunt application choices if the cost of a successful draw is an extended wait period. A marginal tag may not be worth sacrificing two seasons of application opportunities while a premium hunt certainly would be worth the wait. As a result, premium tags may become even harder to draw as hunters will weigh the worth of the tag against the extended waiting period. In other words, you might make it worse.

Pro rate the waiting period based on the odds of draw, or leave it alone.
 
One solution would be to have applicants choose between putting in for the draw, or a general tag. This would significantly increase draw odds for those that put in, and reduce crowding/increase quality on the general units.
Although F&G would probably never go for this as there would be a decrease in tag sales...
 
I would like to say that another option that needs to be looked at is longer waiting periods for a successful Harvest on a Controlled Hunt verses unsuccessfull Harvest on a Controlled Hunt.
I think it has proven to increase overall quality in Nevada. As well as fairness or at least perception of fairness.

Justin
 
I'm definitely not in favor of this one. Little to no change of draw odds.

If they are looking to better draw odds I would suggest the following:

-have multiple seasons in the same draw unit i.e. Archery, muzzy, 1st rifle, 2nd rifle, etc.

-only allow a hunter to apply for one species and one season. They are doing this with OIL tags and have the best draw odds in the west. Do this for deer, elk and antelope.

Keep everything else the same.
 
all i know i lived and hunted idaho all my life. i put in for draw hunts every year with no luck at all, only 1 bull tag i drew 20yrs ago, 1 antelope tag when i was 12yrs old, and never drew a buck tag my hole life. i am 55 now and that is bs. for me, not fair. 86
 
>all i know i lived and
>hunted idaho all my life.
>i put in for draw
>hunts every year with no
>luck at all, only 1
>bull tag i drew 20yrs
>ago, 1 antelope tag when
>i was 12yrs old, and
>never drew a buck tag
>my hole life. i am
>55 now and that is
>bs. for me, not fair.
>86


That's the SADDEST story iv'e heard all day !!
 
all i can say is that i tell the truth and why i can't a fair shake. i do fill general tags on my own, but i just would like to get a draw tag to be proud of. just tweeks me of all the people that draw all the time when they put in. totally bummed. 86
 
I too am angry.....that I haven't won a multi-million dollar Powerball jackpot. Wait a minute....I don't even play the lottery! That's because I looked at the lottery odds and realized my money is much better spent on something more useful, or at the very least, on something with reasonable odds of paying off. Same would be true for Limited Hunt draws in Idaho. If one CHOOSES to apply, again & again, for a hunt with 2% draw odds, one must surely have accepted that he most likely will never draw that tag in an entire lifetime of applying. But it's a chance he is willing to take, for the slim hope of a big pay-off. The math for that is simple & true & unavoidable....it doesn't lie or have emotions. Someone is always going to draw those tags, and some may draw twice within a few years. The math says it will happen. If you want to take the chance of never drawing, then applying for high-demand hunts with single digit odds is for you. If you want to hunt frequently, apply for lower-demand hunts with reasonable odds. It's not really rocket surgery. IMO longer waiting periods will accomplish little, except to provide false solace to the guys who won't accept random probability facts as they apply to their draw choices. Extending the waiting periods may also pack more people into the OIL draws, which have long been the best in the country.
 
>I too am angry.....that I haven't
>won a multi-million dollar Powerball
>jackpot. Wait a minute....I don't
>even play the lottery! That's
>because I looked at the
>lottery odds and realized my
>money is much better spent
>on something more useful, or
>at the very least, on
>something with reasonable odds of
>paying off. Same would be
>true for Limited Hunt draws
>in Idaho. If one CHOOSES
>to apply, again & again,
>for a hunt with 2%
>draw odds, one must surely
>have accepted that he most
>likely will never draw that
>tag in an entire lifetime
>of applying. But it's a
>chance he is willing to
>take, for the slim hope
>of a big pay-off. The
>math for that is simple
>& true & unavoidable....it doesn't
>lie or have emotions. Someone
>is always going to draw
>those tags, and some may
>draw twice within a few
>years. The math says it
>will happen. If you want
>to take the chance of
>never drawing, then applying for
>high-demand hunts with single digit
>odds is for you. If
>you want to hunt frequently,
>apply for lower-demand hunts with
>reasonable odds. It's not really
>rocket surgery. IMO longer waiting
>periods will accomplish little, except
>to provide false solace to
>the guys who won't accept
>random probability facts as they
>apply to their draw choices.
>Extending the waiting periods may
>also pack more people into
>the OIL draws, which have
>long been the best in
>the country.

Totally agree, if your'e EGO has to be pumped up to come home with a big Rack, then your'e chances are slim to draw some low % units. But i'm a meat hunter,and i always put in for a low % first choice and a cow hunt for my second choice,and iv'e killed an elk every year for over 20 years. Where else can you have that opportunity!
 
Wont change the actual stats at all for the most part. People who say oh I only drew one tag in twenty years, are probably putting in for ridiculous tags, like 40 deer which had 1-22 odds roughly. Honestly I think there should be a 2 year wait, for non residents! Lived in idaho for 7 years and drawn 2 good deer tags and a couple of gimme elk tags that are decent. Do the legwork and the math and the majority of people will get to hunt.
 
I want points for the Power Ball. If they did that and guaranteed I would win in say 20 years or less, I would have to think about playing. I would jump in on the ground floor and out live the rest of you guys. Maybe Idaho power Ball could copy the Nevada system. Oh and by the way I get more excited for the Idaho draw with no points then I do with the Utah draw that I have 20 points for. I hope Idaho never changes. "at least I have a chance"

DZ
 
I believe it's all been said here (and many other places, frankly). Only ways to meaningfully change draw odds is to increase supply and/or reduce demand. I do not agree with having longer lay-outs than we already have. Maybe no layouts(except OIL) and pick your species would be a decent compromise?

All I can say for sure is that Idaho's system is far better than most of the other Western states. It favors no one (except residents), is straight-forward to understand, and doesn't entice folks into investing potentially thousands in points schemes. Schemes that are the subject of so much belly-aching every year. I've drawn 2 tags in Idaho in 15 years -not too shabby- if that's it for me, at least I can still go hunting!

JMHO
 

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

2E961453-D3D0-4618-B0FA-6B028B1F3D3C.jpeg
49627E96-02F9-4A8A-B9F3-C593D3FFFF17.jpeg
IMG_20231121_132553.jpg
7F9C8568-4FBC-4F5F-9C95-B99818A69BDD.jpeg
BF0BBA8A-B900-4981-8E76-E7FE624F96D2.jpeg
Sweet Utah Bull
IMG_4381.PNG
IMG_3862.jpeg
IMG_2644 (1).PNG
IMG_3245.jpeg
IMG_20130524_165024_238_zpsa75ed5f2.jpg
20231123_112212.jpg

Idaho Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Bearpaw Outfitters

Idaho Deer & Elk Allocation Tags, Plus Bear, Bison, Lion, Moose, Turkey and Montana Prairie Dogs.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, whitetail, bear, lion and wolf hunts and spend hundreds of hours scouting.

Jokers Wild Outdoors

Trophy elk, whitetail, mule deer, antelope, bear and moose hunts. 35k acres of private land.

Back
Top Bottom