Expo Tag draw odds?

There was a thread here last year that was really, really helpful with the expo draw odds. If I remember right, if you buy one entry into every single tag they offer, your odds of drawing one of them is close to 1 in 100.

Also, if I remember right, the Expo website posts the previous years draw results, so that is a good place to start looking at individual tag entries.

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-30-15 AT 09:06AM (MST)[p]The big game tag odds were one in hundreds to one in thousands. So odds are irrelevant in a statistical analysis. .2% or .02%, either really does not matter.
 
Yes if you put in for all 200 tags you have about a 1% chance of winning something as each addittional drawing you enter increase your odds slightly...do that 100-200 times and it gets around 1% as the other poster stated some odds are 1 in 400 others 1 in 4000...good luck...it happens I drew a tag back in 2010.
 
This is MY year, I can just feel it.
Of course I say the same thing every year! LOL

I'll see if I can REDUCE my chance of drawing by only applying for a few select hunts. At least I couldn't win any less this year than previous years with this new cheap-skate approach!

I'm looking forward to fun at the expo!
Zeke
 
Utard Lottery!

How bout the PLICKS that draw 2 EXPO Tags in one year?








[font color="redhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMsueOnu0kY
 
I've been looking for them this year as well. They are no where to be found on the website this year. I suspect that they might have decided not to post them anymore because it might discourage people from applying when the see the 1/6000 chances.
 
When I apply for a Resident Utah tag I can apply for one deer or one elk, but not for both. I can apply for one Once Life Time species. It costs me $10 for each to apply.

At the Expo I can apply for numerous mule deer for $5 each, same with elk, buffalo, sheep, mt. goat, cougars, bear, turkeys, all for $5 each.

I see the Expo as two hundred extra opportunities to get a Utah tag. (No, I can't afford to apply for all 200, some guys can.) My odds for a Henries deer tag or a Mt. Goat tag in the regular draw are lousy too, so was the Idaho lottery ticket I bought last week.

I'll be applying, regardless of the odds because without a ticket in the bucket, I know it's highly unlikely I'll get a chance to hunt LE units, based on my current bonus point totals.

200 sportsmen are going to go hunt on a pretty darn good unit this fall, maybe I'll be one of them. This I know, if I stay home now, it's a sure thing I'll be staying home again this fall.

And......I like what the folks do with the $3.50 they earn for hosting the event.

See you in the Big Salty!

DC
 
Not only did they fail to post the draw odds this year, they have entirely omitted the information on the drawing process. No info on what happens if you draw to tags, or what happens to your bonus points if you draw a permit from the hunt expo. No info on the impact of drawing a tag on your OIL status either.

Many know this from years past, but who knows what the rules are this year? Have they changed?

It isn't that hard to post the odds and the rules of the drawing. It should be a prerequisite for being awarded the tags to sell.

Bill
 
Wonder how many non res people come to the show. Wonder how bad the 5 non res only tags odds are.
 
Who wouldn't want to travel out of state to drink watered down beer and play the hunting lottery?

Can I get a few muley scratch offs? Maybe a pick-6 Buffalo card? Is there cocktail service available while I play the lottery?
 
I thought residents and nonresidents could apply for all 200 tags with no difference due to residency. Are there special NR only tags now? Does that mean the other 195 are resident only?

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
They have a handful of premium tags that are for non-residents only. The rest are for residents and non-residents. They set aside the non-resident tags to try to attract non-residents to come to the expo.
 
Can someone please tell me the draws I can apply for a premium hunt that has good odds to draw?
 
Muley73, Which tag in the State of Utah do you want to know the odds for? Let me know and I'll get you the numbers (unless of course it is run by SFW, then those are secret, but all other tags have listed draw numbers because the tags are public property and it is the right thing to do).

PS. I looked up the odds for previous years (which have always been available by changing the year in the draw odds URL, ie; http://www.huntexpo.com/odds2012.php or http://www.huntexpo.com/odds2013.php) and none of them work anymore.

Grizzly
 
Grizzly,
Lol! The truth is it doesn't really matter to that many people. Either come and enjoy the opportunity at some great tags for a great cause or don't. It's not really anything to do with odds.

Deerlove,
I'll probably do both!
 
Great cause my @ss.




"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
Every year same thing. Expo rolls around and a few and I mean a minor tiny % of the same guys whine and cry about it. They nitpick at the odds or it's not fair cause I have to travel further or my work schedule doesn't allow me too. The flipside is literally 1000s upon 1000s attend the expo every single year. They apply for tags and they enjoy the booths, the archery shoot, the taxidermy, they sell out the banquet and auctions. They come and they support. They don't post about it on the web they just go and have fun.

I guess if whining and nitpicking on the web makes them the bigger man then I'm ok supporting and having fun and contributing to a good cause and being the smaller person.
 
If my fact comes across as a whine 73,
I guess that would be on you and your
SFW colored glasses.

Theres a critical vote on the hill this week.
Pay attention specifically what Noel and Okerlund
Do. Then get back to me on wether or not this
Is a good cause.


"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
GRIZZ, think grouse and wolf lobbying and
What has gone down the last few years.

This year the word from the hill is the possibility
Of some much needed funding will be shifted
From Fire, Forestry and State Lands to these lobbyists.

Apparently the hysteria of grouse locking up lands
That could be developed and tapped is more important
Than the health of one of the most important ecosystems
In the intermountain area.

We'll see what goes.



"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
Lee,
I could sit here and list the good SFW has done over and over again! 1000s of times over and it wouldn't matter the same few would whine and complain. You've been involved in some of the recent projects and you've even posted positive things about those projects. So no I won't waste my time trying to convince the small handful that will complain no matter what. What I'll do instead is continue to support the group that has done more positive things than any other group to this point in Utah. When and if that becomes a different group ever I'll also support that group.
 
I don't really know the odds. Although I love to hunt. Especially with friends and family. I don't have the football network on my dish. Or watch the NBA. I am a hunter and watch The Outdoor Channel, The Sportsman channel and Pursuit channel. I don't like politics or dealing with politician . Although I think it is a nessecary evil in today's world. That being said why would I not want to attend the Expo? Even thought the odds may be low. There is still a chance. Any chance to do what I love to do is worth it. I myself have never drawn a Expo tag. I have put in every year. But last year my daughter was lucky enough to draw a antelope tag. We had a great time. Let's sapport the things we love and not bicker about the small stuff. Let's strengthen the sport of hunting and not tear it down. He is a picture of our Expo hunt. Of course I am not in it . I am behind the camera.
6368image.jpg
 
BIGJOHNT, I wanted to respond to what you said when you stated: "Let's support the things we love and not bicker about the small stuff. Let's strengthen the sport of hunting and not tear it down."

With all due respect, that is the point of many of us that don't drink the SFW Kool-Aid. Many of us see SFW as the most dangerous group in Utah when it comes to tearing down the sport of hunting as we know it. A very good argument could be made that SFW has taken more hunters out of the annual tag allotment in Utah than every anti-hunting organization combined. And now they appear to be aligning with groups that want to sell off Federal land to the highest bidder, and thus potentially close it to hunting forever (they certainly are NOT working to stop the land grab).

I agree with the last part of your statement completely, "Lets strengthen the sport of hunting and not tear it down." You and I just see the threat differently. Have a good one.

PS. I will still probably attend the Expo because I love our sport and I'd like to draw a public tag as much as anybody, but I don't do it under the misperception that my attending will help wildlife.

Grizzly
 
I must say I do not always agree with all of the decisions that SFW makes. I do understand it's a give and take kind of thing. All things can't always go our way.With dealing in politics I think there maybe a grey area most of us common folks may not understand. But as I have got into some of the issues that where controversial. I could see why they went they way the did on certain topics. I am not just a supporter of one organization . I do support all of them. I think they all have something to add.The land grab issue is a new one as of late. We need to keep up on the that. Forums like this are a good way to keep up to date. I am a Atv/Jeeper as another hobby. I know a lot have been dealing with this down in southern Utah right now. I hope we as a people can help get this under control. Thanks for you help Griz on keeping us all aware.
 
Lumpy, As you know I am one who is straddling the fence on SFW. Could you please inform me as to SFW's stand on the Federal Land changes that the State of Utah is trying to accomplish? I am afraid that the money people who can afford to buy land either by groups or individuals - WILL, and the rest of us will be left to pick ***t with the chickens. Usually that is what happens when we vote people in power.
 
Cannon, that is exactly what will happen with the land issue!!!

When Ted Turner and his likes buys large tracts of public land in Utah, do you think they will leave it open to hunting and recreating by the masses? Not a chance! Hunting rights will be sold off to the outfitter with the deepest pockets, and the average man will be left to hunt what is left. SFW is mostly there to support the wealthy and their desire to purchase/hunt coveted big game tags every year, and they are doing a great job of it!
 
That's a great question CANNONBALL.

I know Peay has said the North American Wildlife
Model is socialism.

I know where Peay came down on HB 141
When fishermen lost stream access.


"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
cannonball, I don't know if SFW has a position on the Federal land changes with the State. If they have one I've not heard what it is.

I was in a meeting about a year ago where it came up and some thought it might be the right thing to do, en light of the Feds past behaviors, ie: wilderness areas, road closures, mustang issues, monument and national park problems, endangered species, EPA problems etc, etc. Others in the meeting don't trust the State anymore than the Feds, some trust the State less, believing the land would be sold or leased by the State, for State revenue. etc.

There were many mixed opinions and mixed opinions. I believe the consensus was to stay informed of the process make every attempt to make sure that public hunting, fishing, and present day multiple use opportunities were protected in perpetuity, regardless of who controls our current public lands, and...... to keep them publicly owned. And to make sure sportsmen were involved in every aspect of the procedure, whether the lands stay under Fed. control or come under State control.

Beyond that meeting, I've never heard another word.

Personally, for what it's worth, I am very worried about the Federal governments inclination to use our public lands for political advantage. I worry everyday that they are trading hunting, fishing and multiple use access for votes and eventually it will cost us our public land access and use. However, it make no sense to me to turn it over to the State's who have already said they want the land because it belongs to the States and the States need it to generate State revenues. Well how do States generate revenue, they tax or lease land. If they want more in income from taxes then it stands to reason they'll need to sell it, so it can be taxed. If they want revenue from leasing it, the sign a lease, contracting with someone to use the land in exchange for fund for the State. Either way multiple use users lose.

It this time I'm willing to leave it with the Feds, and fight them, to retain multiple use, but if they continue to lock it up and lock us out, I may change my mind and support giving the State a try. The SOB's have use between a rock and fricking hard place. It's a damn tar baby, no matter what SFW does or doesn't do.

Let's ask this question cannonball, while we're at it:

What's the RMEF, MDF, DU, SCI, NRA, NTF, position on it? If Utah goes, the entire west will go with it. Where will that put all of these "national" hunting organizations, doesn't anyone want to know what they're position is?

DC
 
I dont think you will ever find draw odds on Expo Tags. If you did find a truthful accounting of Expo Tag odds I think you would be surprised by the number of people inside of the organization that drew Tags with free tickets. Some of us pay to get into the draw and for others its free. Those are the odds.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-11-15 AT 05:17PM (MST)[p]"Some of us pay to get into the draw and for others its free."

Trammer, just curious, is this a statement of fact, or an opinion?

DC
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 09:05AM (MST)[p]>Lee,
>I could sit here and list
>the good SFW has done
>over and over again! 1000s
>of times over and it
>wouldn't matter the same few
>would whine and complain.
>You've been involved in some
>of the recent projects and
>you've even posted positive things
>about those projects. So
>no I won't waste my
>time trying to convince the
>small handful that will complain
>no matter what. What
>I'll do instead is continue
>to support the group that
>has done more positive things
>than any other group to
>this point in Utah.
>When and if that becomes
>a different group ever I'll
>also support that group.

Unfortunately, this is the typical, deceitful, political, emotion-charged, lump-everything-together response we get from SFW members whenever the EXPO tags are brought up. In your eyes, any challenge to the EXPO Permit Program becomes an attack on the EXPO, SFW, the Conservation Permit Program, and the projects that you do because you can't or won't mentally or emotionally separate the funds or the programs. I'm not challenging all those other things. STICK TO MY SPECIFIC REQUEST! What is the now $3.50 used for? On the one hand, we've been told over and over again that it's all needed to administer the EXPO, but you are saying it's used to do projects, while your report/audit shows that it's about 50%/50% (50% to wildlife and 50% to MDF/SFW),(with some questionable expenses and "projects"). But when UWC proposed at the Wildlife Board Meeting that you make it official at 50%/50%, we again heard how great the EXPO was and that you needed the 70% to keep the it going. Which is it?

And why did it take an outside organization to get even the 30%/70% split, when the intent at the outset of this program was to make it the same as the Conservation Permit Program which is 90%/10%? If UWC hadn't made the proposal, would we still be at 0%/100%?

Most of us feel like we're dealing with a mechanic who insists we want to rebuild an engine when all we asked for is a new water pump!
 
What's the RMEF, MDF, DU, SCI, NRA, NTF, position on it? If Utah goes, the entire west will go with it. Where will that put all of these "national" hunting organizations, doesn't anyone want to know what they're position is?

The 5 major groups that have publically taken a stand against the transfer of public lands that I'm aware of are the RMEF, TU, MDF, TRCP, and BHA. There are also many dozens of local sporting groups as well as the wildlife federations of most of the Western States that are opposing the transfer. Lots of sporting industry folks are also stepping up in opposition.

A recent surprise in Wyoming was the Sweetwater County Commission that stated they are in opposition of PLT.

The only Wyoming sportsmen group that I've heard of supporting it, is WYSFW/Bob Wharff. Considering the things that group has gone through recently, I don't see why he's supporting it, but, he is.

This issue really isn't a tough one to oppose and IMO, there is no downside to opposing it.

This whole idea of PLT is not well thought out only about one thing at the end of the day, and that's land disposal.

Every Western State that was given State lands have all sold off a lot of their lands...Wyoming for example has sold 700,000 of the 4.2 million they were given at statehood, nearly 25%. Those lands are not going to be public lands ever again. Nevada has sold almost all of theirs. Its the same all across the West.

Another thing to consider, is that States like MT and WY have existing laws on the books that allow "no net gain" in State lands. The "logic" behind the bills is that the State(s) cant afford to manage any more land. Really? Its pretty tough to reconcile that logic with passing, or attempting to pass laws, that would give Western States millions of acres of federal land that the states would now be required to "manage". Management that they say they cant afford, and have passed laws to limit the amount of State lands that they can acquire.

They couldn't do it fiscally, and the Transfer of Public Lands makes no logical sense on any front, unless your end game is simply land disposal.

Oppose, Oppose, and Oppose...
 
Thanks Buzz. Would you mind PMing me or posting those 5 groups public statements so I can share them with folks that need to see them. Circulating them here in Utah would be helpful.

I'll be attending a local RMEF banquet here next month, it would be good place to handout the RMEF statement, along with the TU, MDF, TRCP, and BHA statements.

DC
 
Lee,
I don't know what the funds are specifically used for that is for the someone other than me to answer. I am nothing more than a vocal bottom level supporter. If the funds are for administration of the organization well I'm ok with that too because without a strong organization those projects don't happen.

To be a strong and effective organization that really has a lasting impact I believe you must have funding. I think any effective organization RMEF,DU,MDF,NWTF, any of them would agree with this.

Now we can go round and round on transparency stuff. Round and round we go. In the mean time, banquets sell out, expos stay packed, dollars are raised and many people contribute to an organization. That organization continues, in my opinion, to still offer the best support for the future of our wildlife and hunting heritage in the state of Utah. You may disagree and continue to fight your crusade but until I see a better org to support I'll stick with SFW.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:20AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:17?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:15?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:08?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:04?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 09:59?AM (MST)

Back to the OP.

Overall, the odds in 2014 were 1 in 1,033 (206,506 applications/200 permits, 14,148 applicants).

If 2014 was typical, the odds broken down were (per 2012):
LE Buck Deer - - - - - - 1 in 1,110
Prem LE Buck Deer - - - 1 in 2,072
LE Bull Elk - - - - - - 1 in 1,224
LE Pronghorn - - - - - -1 in 377
OIL Moose - - - - - - - 1 in 2,536
OIL Moose (non-res) - - 1 in 715
OIL Bison - - - - - - - 1 in 4,482
OIL Bison (non-res) - - 1 in 1,668
OIL Des Bighorn- - - - -1 in 4,456
OIL Des BH(non-res) - - 1 in 781
OIL RM Bighorn- - - - - 1 in 4,149
OIL RM BH (non-res) - - 1 in 772
OIL RM Goat - - - - - - - - 1 in 2,625
OIL RM Goat(non-res) - 1 in 655

I'm sorry, but I didn't figure the odds for Bear, Cougar or Turkey when I did this a couple of years ago.

Edit: I tried to line up the figures for easy reading but the final result isn't anything like the screen.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:27AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:01?AM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 11:00?AM (MST)

>Lee,
>I don't know what the funds
>are specifically used for that
>is for the someone other
>than me to answer.
>I am nothing more than
>a vocal bottom level supporter.
> If the funds are
>for administration of the organization
>well I'm ok with that
>too because without a strong
>organization those projects don't happen.
>
>
>To be a strong and effective
>organization that really has a
>lasting impact I believe you
>must have funding. I
>think any effective organization RMEF,DU,MDF,NWTF,
>any of them would agree
>with this.
>
>Now we can go round and
>round on transparency stuff.
>Round and round we go.
> In the mean time,
>banquets sell out, expos stay
>packed, dollars are raised
>and many people contribute to
>an organization. That organization
>continues, in my opinion, to
>still offer the best support
>for the future of our
>wildlife and hunting heritage in
>the state of Utah.
>You may disagree and continue
>to fight your crusade but
>until I see a better
>org to support I'll stick
>with SFW.

Thanks for the honest response! And I agree with your points about SFW being a strong, effective and influential organization, but therein lies the rub. Your opinion that they are offering the best support for the future of our wildlife and HUNTING HERITAGE is where we differ and all indications via the proposals and statements I've seen tell me otherwise. It was very noticeable on the mule deer committee where I and another UWC member served and was noticeable on the bear committee and now the cougar committee where some of our members serve or have served. The only exception was our joint bear proposal which I got involved in only by accident (and a little snooping during a lunch break from a Wildlife Board meeting).

Otherwise, it's a constant push for more trophy hunting, more LE units and the conservation permits that go with them, cutting general permits because of "overcrowding", reducing opportunities for large family hunts, shortening seasons, restricting access, increasing red tape, restricting the size of the antlers hunted, increasing buck to doe ratios, etc. Yes, I know it's all perfectly legal, but that doesn't mean all of your projects, events, or proposals are in the best interest of the majority of Utah outdoorsmen and women, nor even in the best interest of the wildlife. I support the ones that are, but oppose the ones that aren't.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 02:19PM (MST)[p]Very good links above by Buzz. It is disappointing to see a sportsmen's group such as SFW not take a stance on an issue which is the driver of hunting and wildlife in Utah. Their silence leads me to believe they are for the transfer of lands. The leader of the lands transfer push, once said "it is up to the State to decide which lands need to be protected, which lands need to be developed and which lands need to be sold". Will they be selling your favorite spot to recreate, or maybe mine? Surely they will be selling someone's area they enjoy and along with it the wildlife which uses that land.

The odds above are interesting in the case of non-residents. It looks like individual non-residents attending the Expo number at most 800, simply based off the non-resident only application hunts, but that number may increase with non-hunting spouses. They only comprise 5% of the applicants and maybe 8-10% of the applications. I thought the purpose of the event was to draw in non-residents to spend their cash and impact the economy. Residents come and spend which impacts the economy, but they would have spent money elsewhere if they did not attend the Expo.

We will make it up to walk around and apply for a couple tags. Probably attend a banquet this Spring. The direction SFW is headed gives me pause in supporting them.
 
"Heres what a few have to say:


RMEF statement:

http://rmefblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/rmef-opposes-sale-or-transfer-of.html

BHA:

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/images/Public_Lands_Report.pdf"

Thanks Buss

BackCountry hunters presents a thoughtful discussion and reflects a position that I and a lot of the the SFW member (not all) I've talked to believe. Again, I do not know nor have I seen an official statement from SFW regarding the matter, nor have I seen much if anything from the others I mentioned.

So far as RMEF, here is my observation of the material you posted.

With the exception of Mr. Allen, Pres. RMEF, the entire video was on preserving public lands and one gentleman referred specifically to preserving State public lands as his concern, in the way of the Adirondack State Park in New York State. So the video had little to do with the transfer of Federal lands to the States and more to do with keeping public lands public and not selling them. The State of Utah claims it will do, like New York State has done with the Adirondack, manage these lands as public land, owned by the State of Utah. (I don't believe they can or will, nor do I believe Utah even wants to, but I believe they need to say they do, in order to silence the likes of us.)

Mr. Allen's halting remarks on the video, where he could barely bring himself to look at the camera, while he said it, was telling. That was fricking scary, if you're trying to determine his commitment to the fight. He looked pretty tentative to me.

RMEF's letter, signed by Mr. Allen, was calculated, better than his comments on the video, but certainly not the pointed position that these organization could be making regarding this issue.

Here's what I'm guessing, Buss:

These national and other hunting/fish organizations know this sucker is a sticky, nasty, political, philosophical, emotional, quagmire. They have members that hate Democrat policy and the big government/big brother/I'll take care of you stupid people, approach to the world. They also have members that hate Republican policy and they're free enterprise/rugged individualistic/take care of yourself, approach to everything.

They know if they side with one side or the other, they loose. So.....................they are standing back and watching, laying low, as at were.......believing there's not a snow balls change in hell that the Feds will transfer current Federal lands to the States. If they can just shut up and let this run it political course and let the State's and the Feds settle for something less, where the States get more money from the Feds, to "make up for the loss of revenue, due to Federally held land" they can get by without offending half their membership and their major funding donors. I believe that's why Mr. Allen looked like he wanted to puke, I'm convinced he hated to have to say what he said, regardless of what he thought. And he had that letter written nearly as chokingly.

I get it, it's a mess. The Federal government has created this mess, the States have grievances that need to be addressed. There needs to be changes in the relationship between the States and Federal government's controls, management and the loss of revenue to the States, under the current public lands programs.

Look, the west is owned by the Federal government, the east is owned by the private sector. Eastern States receive tax revenue for their roads, schools, and public services from those privately held lands. Western States don't. We have roads, schools and other public services that need to be funded as well.

If we want to keep these land public, AND WE DO, we need to compensate the States that have these huge federal land tracks with federally collected tax money "from the private sector States". That means, the eastern private sector States need to anti-up to keep the Federal lands "they want kept public" from being sold so western States can pay for the public services required for our growing populations. I'll pay my extra to keep these land publics as well, but why do I have to pay extra to keep my State's land public, so that people from other States, who own their lands, can come here and enjoy what I'm paying to keep public?

When these western State had small populations, per capita, they had enough tax revenue to provide necessary government services, as our populations have grown, our cities have become large, our per capita need for public services has increased correspondingly. Hence the need for an increase in tax revenues. Utah is 69% Federal land, essentially no income for Utah other than a few million tourist dollars. Hardly enough taxes come off the tourist dollars to pay to keep the roads to the National Parks paved, so our eastern cousins can come see the sight.

So............I don't want to see Utah or any Western State take over the present Federally controlled lands. Nor do I believe it will happen any time soon, if ever, but like I said previously, the Feds need to change their program, the program they are presently using has caused this "rising up" of the Western States and they'll continue to stay "on the hunt" and even more so, if the Federal government doesn't bring appropriate equity to the States.

SFW, RMEF, MDF and all the others have little to do with it, and if the truth be known, they really don't want to, because it will cause huge internal rift within their organizations. It's a tar baby they don't want to take a hold of............Mr. Allen included.

DC
 
DC,

I would like to comment on this:

If we want to keep these land public, AND WE DO, we need to compensate the States that have these huge federal land tracks with federally collected tax money "from the private sector States". That means, the eastern private sector States need to anti-up to keep the Federal lands "they want kept public" from being sold so western States can pay for the public services required for our growing populations. I'll pay my extra to keep these land publics as well, but why do I have to pay extra to keep my State's land public, so that people from other States, who own their lands, can come here and enjoy what I'm paying to keep public?.

The states with large tracts of public lands and low populations are being compensated by the Eastern States.

No State that I am aware of in the interior West, pays the BLM, FS, NPS, USFWS, etc. from State funds to manage federal lands. That is all provided by Federally collected tax dollars, that the lions share of comes from States that have higher populations. In most of the Western States, we receive more federal tax money than we pay (Utah received 1.07 for every 1.00 they pay, Wyoming 1.11 for every 1.00, Montana 1.47, New Mexico 2.02, etc.).

Combine that with the relatively low populations of the interior West, the many are paying for the few in regard to all the items you listed, including federal land management, highways, infrastructure, etc.

I will be the first to say that the relationship between the Feds and States could be improved a lot. I think collaboration between the States and Feds in regard to land management needs to happen more often, more efficiently, etc.

However, to say that collaboration and working together between the Feds and States doesn't happen is disingenuous, as a best case, and a flat out lie in many cases.

Those that squawk the loudest about the Feds not working with them are typically those that don't want to have anything but their own way. Not how a collaborative process works. They quickly become frustrated and go to bashing.

Those that don't immediately get their way, they start the rhetoric of how bad the Feds are to work with. Very seldom is anything mentioned when the States sit down with the Feds and through a collaborative process have great successes. Perfect example is how well the State of Wyoming is working with the Feds on sage grouse. Good, positive work, getting accomplished by strong working relationships between federal and state agencies, that doesn't make good fodder for political pundits, news headlines, and message board rhetoric.

That's how I see it...things aren't half as bad as most people make them out to be.

I will never support a transfer of federal lands to the States.
 
>SO how are draw odds calculated
>before anyone knows how many
>people will enter the draw?
>

They aren't with any certainty, because, besides not knowing the number of applicants, we also change the number of permits for each species from year to year. But folks like to think they can better play future odds by looking at the past odds.
 
2lumpy, the thing that SFW needs to realize is that all the "habitat" work in the world, all the "wildlife transplants" in the world, and all the "predator control" in the world will mean absolutely nothing to the regular Utah hunter if the land they hunt on becomes private.

The biggest threat, the one that trumps all other threats, is loss of access. I will rabidly fight any group that works towards the Transfer of Public Lands... and frankly you should too.

Grizzly
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-15 AT 05:21PM (MST)[p]"I will rabidly fight any group that works towards the Transfer of Public Lands... and frankly you should too."

and.................what makes you think I don't?

With that, I'm finished with this discussion, at this time. I've answered cannonballs question, to the best of my ability, shared my opinion and my personal position on the issue. Turning this discussion into an SFW against the world melee, isn't in SFW's interest. I support SFW and do what ever I can to help them achieve their mission.... and frankly you should too."

DC
 
SFW/BGF has plenty of sway in Utah politics, heck they can get themselves checks written from the taxpayer checkbook for millions of dollars to "lobby" regarding wolves and sage grouse.

I'm sure you get SFW's emails periodically saying to "contact your Congressmen" about various issues related to Sportsmen. Have you ever received one alluding to the fact that SFW is against the Transfer of Public Lands? Why not?

The TPL is gaining steam and votes are happening (an important one sponsored by Dabakis comes to mind). Public comment is ongoing and people are taking sides. If SFW is half as powerful as they think they are and is against TPL, why are they not working loudly and publicly against the seizure of public property? Why is SFW not using the same tactics that the pro-wood burning crowd used so successfully a few weeks ago to defeat Gov. Herbert? Are the wood burners more powerful, effective, and smarter than SFW?

SFW uses political pressure to advance their agenda (granted, as a lobbyist group should), yet we have seen nothing to say they are trying to preserve public ownership of Federal property.

You certainly are aware of all these facts, and they are indisputable, yet you state "I support SFW and do what ever I can to help them achieve their mission".

I have never seen SFW work "behind the scenes" on a major legislative issue, so that certainly isn't the case. Their M.O. is to rally the troops, send emails, organize attendance at meetings, and work to get their puppets in the Legislature on their side. If SFW is against TPL, why are they not doing any of this? Are you trying to convince me that SFW thinks it is prudent to secretly be against TPL but not join RMEF and other conservation organizations in publicly saying so?

The day SFW makes a clear, strong, effective argument and shows true force that they are fighting the State seizure of public property (which the State readily admits can be sold as needed), then I will log-in to SFW and pay my membership dues. You have my word. I will overlook what I see as SFW's other shortfalls and support them based on this one issue, because I truly feel this issue trumps all others and is the one issue that could affect hunting in the Western US for eternity. If my future grandkids don't hunt deer and elk on public land, it will be solely because TPL became the law. This bill is all that matters right now. Everything else is ancillary.

As it stands, sportsmen stand to lose more than almost any other group if the TPL goes through... and an organization that claims to be FOR sportsmen is, at best, standing idly by. That is an absolute disgrace and all lovers of outdoors should be calling them on the carpet. As this cancerous idea grows and festers, any sportsman's organization that doesn't fight it does not deserve the right to call themselves a sportsman's organization.

This truly is a "with us, or against us" occasion.

Grizzly
 
I feel so strongly against federal lands being turned over to the state that I have written our federal and state representatives and would vote against them should they want the states to have our lands. A lot of past experiences have shown that the State of Utah will sell to the highest bidder all the lands they can get their hands on. It is just a matter of time. Look at Mitoge by Fishlake, look at Monroe Mountain and try to get on those lands for hunting now. They are lost to us for ever. This is just the lands by me and this is happening all over Utah

I still do not know if the SFW has made a stand on this issue and if they have I wish they would stand up and be heard.
 
>I am Republican thru and thru,
>but this one issue trumps
>party lines.


That is where I stand also and we are not alone. It is absolute craziness to believe the State will maintain what we have better than the Federal government.
 
Griz,
I agree with a lot of what you say. I don't understand how it would benifit SFW or its members if the state was in control of large track of land and sell them off. I know SFW has a long track record of wanting multiple use of our public lands. When Clinton didn't consult with any Ut leaders and crammed his Escalante national monuments in Utah and was going to block hunting, SFW and FNAWS were groups that got hunting on them. That would have effected sheep units and Paunsagant deer hunting.

When UEA, one of the largest unions, were going to block off access to general public school trust lands, alot of bookcliffs and lease out to outfitters to make more money. SFW with the DWR helped resolve that conflict and maintained public access. Elk draws odds would be worse if school trust lands were blocked off from public access.

Sportsmen groups were going to do water projects to help deer,sheep,antelope,chuckers, etc on wilderness areas and were threatened with a lawsuit from environmental groups, because it wasn't natural. It would benifit hunters and non hunters, help wildlife, but they didn't care. They really want to stop hunting. THe ESA for sage hens, desert tortus, wolves, etc are to block access and stop hunting.

It depends on who the governor of Utah is, and who is in the White house, would depend if Utah having more control would be good or bad. IMO. Lumpy was correct. Lots of thoughts and different opinons.
 
The odds at the expo are very low, and they always will be. But as a Utah resident, the general draw is lower in almost every case. Here is why:

I'm in the LE elk pool. I am prohibited by rule from putting in for deer or antelope. Therefore, odds of drawing a LE deer or antelope tag in the general draw are 0.

I'm in the OIL bison pool. I'm prohibited by rule from putting in for moose, sheep, or goat hunts. So my odds in the general draw for those species are 0. (And my chances at the expo aren't much different than in the general draw for bison either.)

Not everyone supports the distribution of tags in this way, and I can see the logic behind that position. I don't love it myself. But I love to hunt. The expo gives me more chances to do what I love. So I play the long odds. 2012 was my first year ever putting in the expo lottery. I put in for 4 hunts, and drew the Pauns rifle tag. That was 3 years ago. I'd say I'm about due!
 
Elkfromabove, what was the source of your information on the Draw odds you posted? I am not opposed to the Expo Tags provided there are past years odds published for the tags and all Tickets are paid for with cash and the process is audited. For now, I do know people who have drawn hunts With tickets that were gifted to them by the organization. And I am even OK with that provided it is all disclosed. So even using the numbers you posted, are the free ones included in your numbers or are they in addition to your numbers and how many free ones were there?

A couple of years ago a friend of mine who was interested in one of the Hunts put together a mathematical model and predicted how many people would be and could be in the drawing for the hunt that had special limitations put on it. Him and I estimated that there were 2 or 3 times the number of tickets in the barrel than was even possible based on the model.I am always suspicious of raffles. I have seen too many fishy outcomes over the years.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-15 AT 10:35PM (MST)[p]>Elkfromabove, what was the source of
>your information on the Draw
>odds you posted? I
>am not opposed to the
>Expo Tags provided there are
>past years odds published for
>the tags and all Tickets
>are paid for with cash
>and the process is audited.
>For now, I do know
>people who have drawn hunts
>With tickets that were gifted
>to them by the organization.
>And I am even OK
>with that provided it is
>all disclosed. So even using
>the numbers you posted, are
>the free ones included in
>your numbers or are they
>in addition to your numbers
>and how many free ones
>were there?
>
> A couple of years
>ago a friend of mine
>who was interested in one
>of the Hunts put together
>a mathematical model and predicted
>how many people would be
>and could be in the
>drawing for the hunt that
>had special limitations put on
>it. Him and I estimated
>that there were 2 or
>3 times the number of
>tickets in the barrel than
>was even possible based on
>the model.I am always suspicious
>of raffles. I have seen
>too many fishy outcomes over
>the years.

It came from a report that was published (by the EXPO, as I remember) and available online, (http://www.huntexpo.com/odds2012.php) but it no longer is available and neither are updates as near as I can discover. (It was referenced on a Utah Wildlife Network thread 10/25/2012 - "2013 Hunt Expo" post #5) It had the number of applicants per hunt and I just added them up and divided the applicants by the number of hunts in each category.

I have absolutely no idea which ones may have been free, if any. But I do know that there were a total of 200 permits and that there was a draw open to the public and signed by about a dozen witnesses, and that there was an audit on the process conducted by the DWR. That doesn't mean there weren't some transfers of permits after the draw or some application transfers before. All the audit says is that the draw process itself was random.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-15 AT 11:58PM (MST)[p]Trammer, first of all the draw is not tickets in a barrel. It is done the same way as the draw of fallen Nevada. It is held at the division office. You keep referring to things that are totally not true. The draw on the expo tags us watched very closely by people who would love to bury them.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-18-15 AT 07:09AM (MST)[p]here is the hyperlink for the draw odds for the expo.

After going to the hope page of huntexpo.com click on the upper left hand button at the top of the page that reads "Apply for the the 200 permits"

Then after that page loads scroll down and under the script that shows the "apply now" button the link for the draw odds is in blue.

Hope this helps, if not here is the page itself.

http://huntexpo.com/odds.php





Tallbuck1
 
>LAST EDITED ON Feb-18-15
>AT 07:09?AM (MST)
>
>here is the hyperlink for the
>draw odds for the expo.
>
>
>After going to the hope page
>of huntexpo.com click on the
>upper left hand button at
>the top of the page
>that reads "Apply for the
>the 200 permits"
>
>Then after that page loads scroll
>down and under the script
>that shows the "apply now"
>button the link for the
>draw odds is in blue.
>
>
>Hope this helps, if not here
>is the page itself.
>
>http://huntexpo.com/odds.php
>
>
>
>
>
>Tallbuck1

Thanks!
 
>This is great to see.
>I like the transparency.
>
>Are these real-time odds? Or last
>years?
>
>Grizzly

Your welcome.

All I know is what the page says at their top. Current Draw Permit Statistics. Maybe,just maybe M_73 could find out for the general public if it is last years stats.

Anyway, good luck to all who play.




Tallbuck1
 
All of the draw odds posted so far in this thread are from recession years, the 2012 estimation of 800 non-resis in attendance is also from a recession year.

I can tell you this years expo did not resemble a recession year expo. It was the biggest ever as far as booths and many records were set $ wise in auctions.

The attendance was much higher this year, place was packed. If there were an estimated 800 non-resis in 2012 I would conservatively guess double that this year....so figure that into your odds guessing.

Scary to see how big that thing has gotten.....hope it does not catch on in other states.
 
>you have 0% odds if you
>don't put in .how,s them
>odds??

Them must be about the same kinda Odds as when I do put in!:D








[font color="redhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMsueOnu0kY
 
"At least the money goes to a good cause"
Muley 73, that's the funniest thing I've read on here in quite some time!

Sadly this is what the majority of people think when they apply for the 5 dollar permits at the expo.they know that their chances of pulling a permit are horrible but hey "my money is going towards bettering wildlife right? Wrong,that money goes straight into SFW's bank account with no stipulation on how it should be spent.By no means in hell do I consider that a good cause!
 
He was there. I saw him in the background of the Channel 5 news. At least I think that was him covering the background in the back.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-23-15 AT 10:16AM (MST)[p]The odds may not be as bad as you think. I was a non resident that attended. I didn't put in for the nonresident only tags even though I attended the expo. The problem is the affordability of those once in a lifetime tags. I don't have the money to pay the fee if I drew out. So just because you see lots of people, that doesn't mean odds will get worse. I personally was disappointed this year due to high priced merchandise. I didn't see any good deals at most the booth that I visited. I guess my personal economy is still down compared to most people.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Feb-23-15
>AT 10:16?AM (MST)
. I personally was
>disappointed this year due to
>high priced merchandise. I
>didn't see any good deals
>at most the booth that
>I visited. I guess
>my personal economy is still
>down compared to most people.
>

I too was a little disappointed with not many companies offering up bigger show specials. I am in no way rich but there were a lot of things out of my league this year compared to expos of past.





Tallbuck1
 
I know there is controversy over this event, but I am not sure who SFW is, can you let me know? And why they get to collect the funds with no accountability? Sorry for being uninformed! But I would like to correct that, so I will know if I should support this event or not, in the future, thanks
 
Birdman, let me make 2 points about the expotags/huntdraws. First free is free. I know people who have drawn hunts with tickets that have been given to them for free. What I dont know is why. Perhaps SFW has some kind of an Angel program where big money guys put up a few bucks to buy tickets for people that the organization deems worthy. But a Liar, is something I am not. Please correct or challenge anything I say. I have been corrected 1 time that I am aware of (when I misread a date). But dont challenge me by just calling me a liar.

Second the only thing that I am suggesting is auditing. When you raffle off a half million dollars worth of hunts. It makes sense that someone should do some accounting afterward. Call it winners accounting.On the 11 hunts that were drawn from the barrels a quick search could verify payment for the tickets and, thats not the primary issue. The primary issue is honesty from all people in the drawing. For example, the 3 hunts that had limitations and required a blue ticket were capped at 6 tickets per person.Did anybody dump all the tickets out after the drawing, log the names and double check to see if any of the winners had more than 6 tickets in the barrel? What about the white ones?

I did notice that SFW Lawyer drew a good hunt as did the stockbroker of the guy running the hunt draw.

Blue tickets were being sold to anyone who would step up with $75 and buy them. How many did the guys that won have in the barrel?..Its important because for stone sheep hunts that are worth $40k, the raffle was a good bet. I doubt there were 3500 tickets in the barrel (the approximate number needed to make it a bad bet) good things to know...especially for lawyers and stockbrokers.
 
Respectfully, devo, your question has been asked many times here on these MM forum. Many answers have been given, and situations discussed, in Technicolor detail. Many in Utah belong to SFW (Sportsmen for Fish and Wild Life), for a lot of different reasons, many do not, for many different reasons.

If you'd like hours of reading on the subject there are volumes written here, in the MM archives, that you can find through the use of the Search tools here in.

Regarding SFW's accountability, rest assured, the claim of "no accountability" has been investigated and reviewed at the highest and the lowest levels of authority in the State, in recent years.

After years of accusations and corresponding State investigations there has been no legal infractions or charges upheld, but rather than retype everything again, and again, each time someone new comes to the forum asks, I'd suggest you research 3 or 4 years worth of posts on SFW, in the MM archives.

I would just simply ask that you do the research and follow the claims and counter claims in depth, rather than assume everything you're told is accurate.

Unfortunately, differences in hunting, fishing, and conservation implementation will always exist among passionate sportsmen, those differences, too often, cause us to look for reasons to discredit one group's methods over another's.

All the best in your search for answers.

DC
 
Devo,

I agree with DC when he says to do your own research and form your own opinion. I just disagree on where that research should be done. Don't look on MM and see what anonymous internet cowboys have to say. Google "sltrib.com SFW" and see what The Salt Lake Tribune has written over the last several years. They have published many articles and are the only investigative newspaper in the State of Utah (where SFW is based and does most of its work).

You can quickly find numerous articles from various authors that will give you some background with much more verifiable fact than what you can find on MM... then make up your mind from there.

Grizzly
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-23-15 AT 09:12PM (MST)[p]
And I agree with Grizzly, the tribune has written much and most of it negative, they would be the first and publish the largest, loudest headlines if there was anything they could hang illegally on SFW.

In my opinion, the same opinion I've had since 1983, ten years before SFW was even a glimmer in anyone's mind, the salt lake tribune is no friend of hunters, hardly tolerable of fisherman. No offense intended to the tribune or the philosophy of it's liberal arts reporters, they own a newspaper and thankfully, they are entitled to express their opinions and their view of the world, like every other freedom loving American. You'll never get an objective report from those that see the world from Grizzly's and the anti-SFW perspective.

Do the research, try not to judge prematurely, try to sort out the facts, as best you can, and draw your own conclusions. Sometimes you need actually give some face time to individuals, from both sides of the aisle, to get a deep enough understanding of the conflicts. No harm in getting it from the source, along with us story tellers.

I was opposed to SFW long before many of the folks ever sighted down a rifle barrel, fought them, aggressively, in private and in public hearings. I'm now one of hundreds of their most passionate supporters. Grizzly and others have chosen a different path to follow. Thankfully, we are all afforded that freedom in this great country!

It's worth the effort to do the research devo.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not actually a full blown anonymous cowboy, I'm however an old has-been cowboy, but I'm actually fully disclosed and it's very easy to research my back ground and my credibility or lack there of.

DC
 
Trammer, You are welcome to think and say what you want but you need to also back it up. You think you know people that have had free tickets given to them. That I question but can not prove it as you are not willing to prove otherwise. Also if next year you would like to be the one that counts all those tickets after the drawing to make sure all is legit let me know and I will do what I can to arrange it. I am sure that there are people that will try to cheat, there always is. As to the angel program you refer to, it is your thoughts and maybe bringing out things that you would try if you are in charge. They are not happening here except in your mind. You were in the drawing of the sheep hunts, and was well aware of the fact that the drums were spun in front of all there and on camera for those that were in the room. No one with SFW drew the tickets, but the guides that gave the hunts away drew for there hunts. It was done in front of hundreds of people. Everything was up front for all to see. Everything was done proper. You can wnat to think things were dishonest, but there was lots of eyes on the drums.
You grab at straws in some of your accusations that you have made with me in the last week or so. That is all that it is. Accusations that are not true and you know that they are not true. I know you have a problem with certian people and that is your right but do not drag me into your personal disagreements making accusations that are false and you know that they are false. I may be friends with people you do not like, but making me the bad person is not correct.
 
Devo, if you believe in this:

Wildlife as Public Trust Resources
Elimination of Markets for Game
Allocation of Wildlife by Law
Wildlife Should Only be Killed for a Legitimate Purpose
Wildlife is Considered an International Resource
Science is the Proper Tool for Discharge of Wildlife Policy
Democracy of Hunting

Then you can't believe in the SFW model.






"The future is large scale auction tags.
The majority of the tags should go up
for auction anually. It MIGHT even be
good to allow second sales of auction
tags as in outfitters purchasing tags
and then re-selling them to the public."
TRISTATE 8/17/2012
 
Thanks guys, I will do some looking into it, I went to the expo this year and about 4 years ago. I have belonged to the Rocky Mountain Elk foundation for years and really like what they do. I think the idea of using our money and efforts to help support the thing we all seem to live for is great, but I also know that many organizations that purport to be charitable or supportive of a cause are scams. I would not want to support something that doesn't actually contribute to keeping our pastime available to all, and that is why I was asking. I know I want to "win" something as much as the next guy, but if I found out that there was some negative aspect and it was actually just a way to benefit a few, then I couldn't feel right about contributing my money even for a chanced to "win". I will have to do some serious reading it sounds like!
 

Similar threads

LIK2HNT
Arizona Drew Statics
Replies
5
Views
466
LIK2HNT
LIK2HNT
G
Seeking information for book cliffs muzzleloader deer.
Replies
8
Views
913
Camper_A1
Camper_A1
devobrodie
west desert vernon Archery
Replies
2
Views
250
devobrodie
devobrodie

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

9095A2D3-20A5-4791-BF24-94D61342CB4E.jpeg
20151213_155624-1.jpg
329F22CF-AC43-4C1C-AAC8-E9D0C20025B1.jpeg
IMG_1966.JPG
E4F384DE-C15F-4DC4-8076-023FAE0F0EFD.png
Mike's '23 Muley Pack Out.jpg
My '23 Muley.jpg
20240814_133714.jpg
IMG_3231.JPG
IMG_3248.jpeg
moose 8.png
IMG_7729.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom