I thought Idaho had a 10% tag quota. I looked at the 2012 drawing stats for Elk and saw that some hunts didn't draw any tags for nonresidents and some were way below 10%. One hunt I was interested in had 400 tags and gave 0 for nonresidents! There were nonresidents that applied. Something smelly about this if you ask me.
Nonresident Tags quota
- Thread starter Kentuck
- Start date
Muleymemories
Active Member
- Messages
- 466
Remember 10% of total tags, not 10% of each individual controlled unit.
sticksender
Active Member
- Messages
- 999
Idaho doesn't allocate any tags to NR for any species. They simply allow NR's to be in the draw with everyone else, and subject them to a ceiling of 10%. They're not guaranteed of ANY tags. It's a random draw, anything can happen. The only outcome that is guaranteed is that NR can't get more than 10% of the tags.
Oftentimes, the volume of NR applicants to a particular hunt code is a very small percentage, and therefore most or all of the tags are won by residents in the random draw, just because of their overwhelming numbers. And sometimes it's just the luck of the draw that NR do not reach the 10% ceiling.
Oftentimes, the volume of NR applicants to a particular hunt code is a very small percentage, and therefore most or all of the tags are won by residents in the random draw, just because of their overwhelming numbers. And sometimes it's just the luck of the draw that NR do not reach the 10% ceiling.
FemoralArchery
Active Member
- Messages
- 220
>Remember 10% of total tags, not
>10% of each individual controlled
>unit.
That's not true. Its up to 10% of each individual controlled hunt as well as 10% of the controlled hunt tags per species.
>10% of each individual controlled
>unit.
That's not true. Its up to 10% of each individual controlled hunt as well as 10% of the controlled hunt tags per species.
Sierra
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,114
>
>
>Oftentimes, the volume of NR applicants
>to a particular hunt code
>is a very small percentage,
>and therefore most or all
>of the tags are won
>by residents in the random
>draw, just because of their
>overwhelming numbers. And sometimes it's
>just the luck of the
>draw that NR do not
>reach the 10% ceiling.
The above response seems to address the issue the best. That would explain why certain units draw way fewer than 10 percent year after year, while others are almost always near 10 percent.
>
>Oftentimes, the volume of NR applicants
>to a particular hunt code
>is a very small percentage,
>and therefore most or all
>of the tags are won
>by residents in the random
>draw, just because of their
>overwhelming numbers. And sometimes it's
>just the luck of the
>draw that NR do not
>reach the 10% ceiling.
The above response seems to address the issue the best. That would explain why certain units draw way fewer than 10 percent year after year, while others are almost always near 10 percent.
Muleymemories
Active Member
- Messages
- 466
>>Remember 10% of total tags, not
>>10% of each individual controlled
>>unit.
>
>
>That's not true. Its up to
>10% of each individual controlled
>hunt as well as 10%
>of the controlled hunt tags
>per species.
Yes you are right, what I meant to say is up to 10% allocated per controlled hunt but not guaranteed for NR to draw a single tag in any particular hunt. More or less a crap shoot for a NR!
>>10% of each individual controlled
>>unit.
>
>
>That's not true. Its up to
>10% of each individual controlled
>hunt as well as 10%
>of the controlled hunt tags
>per species.
Yes you are right, what I meant to say is up to 10% allocated per controlled hunt but not guaranteed for NR to draw a single tag in any particular hunt. More or less a crap shoot for a NR!
LAST EDITED ON Jun-04-13 AT 12:37PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Jun-04-13
>AT 12:22?PM (MST)
>
>I understand now. So basically I
>have the same chance as
>drawing a tag as a
>Resident, only 13 times the
>cost.
Our NR fees are RIDICULOUS, I agree. It's like $2,100 for you guys to pick up your trophy tag if you do draw.
They should implement a cheap conservation license ($30 ish) for NR to apply for controlled hunts. To help offset that, I'd like to see our resident fees raised a bit. I like our system for the most part, but having most NR hunters hate it is not helping F&G revenue.
>AT 12:22?PM (MST)
>
>I understand now. So basically I
>have the same chance as
>drawing a tag as a
>Resident, only 13 times the
>cost.
Our NR fees are RIDICULOUS, I agree. It's like $2,100 for you guys to pick up your trophy tag if you do draw.
They should implement a cheap conservation license ($30 ish) for NR to apply for controlled hunts. To help offset that, I'd like to see our resident fees raised a bit. I like our system for the most part, but having most NR hunters hate it is not helping F&G revenue.
>
>
>Our NR fees are RIDICULOUS, I
>agree. It's like $2,100 for
>you guys to pick up
>your trophy tag if you
>do draw.
>
>They should implement a cheap conservation
>license ($30 ish) for NR
>to apply for controlled hunts.
>To help offset that, I'd
>like to see our resident
>fees raised a bit. I
>like our system for the
>most part, but having most
>NR hunters hate it is
>not helping F&G revenue.
I agree and feel even more so now that I know I really don't have much chance of drawing a tag. An Elk Tag would cost me $571.50 where a resident pays $43.50. I do feel non-residents should pay more but how much is the question. I haven't been back to Idaho since they raised their fees a few years ago. Now everyone should see why they haven't sold out their non-resident elk tags since that fee raise.
They should give 10% (or less) of the tags to non-residents in a non-resident only draw. If not enough non-residents put in for that 10%, then the tags go back to residents in the draw.
>
>Our NR fees are RIDICULOUS, I
>agree. It's like $2,100 for
>you guys to pick up
>your trophy tag if you
>do draw.
>
>They should implement a cheap conservation
>license ($30 ish) for NR
>to apply for controlled hunts.
>To help offset that, I'd
>like to see our resident
>fees raised a bit. I
>like our system for the
>most part, but having most
>NR hunters hate it is
>not helping F&G revenue.
I agree and feel even more so now that I know I really don't have much chance of drawing a tag. An Elk Tag would cost me $571.50 where a resident pays $43.50. I do feel non-residents should pay more but how much is the question. I haven't been back to Idaho since they raised their fees a few years ago. Now everyone should see why they haven't sold out their non-resident elk tags since that fee raise.
They should give 10% (or less) of the tags to non-residents in a non-resident only draw. If not enough non-residents put in for that 10%, then the tags go back to residents in the draw.
Some good points made in this thread.
It is very expensive to apply as a non resident. My beef is $154 to buy a license plus application fees. And just to rub it in they throw in a three day fishing license that you have to decide at time of purchase what dates you will use it!
The main reason I dislike paying the 154 is that as a non res for some hunts there is a very real possibility no non residents get drawn and you basically have no chance at your second choice.
Maybe if they drew the hunters the way nevada does so you could get your second choice I may like it better.
Oh wait I can already hear it there is always general hunts.
Bottom line is Idaho needs cash. How can states like Utah afford to allow people to apply for two years on one $60 hunting license?
It is very expensive to apply as a non resident. My beef is $154 to buy a license plus application fees. And just to rub it in they throw in a three day fishing license that you have to decide at time of purchase what dates you will use it!
The main reason I dislike paying the 154 is that as a non res for some hunts there is a very real possibility no non residents get drawn and you basically have no chance at your second choice.
Maybe if they drew the hunters the way nevada does so you could get your second choice I may like it better.
Oh wait I can already hear it there is always general hunts.
Bottom line is Idaho needs cash. How can states like Utah afford to allow people to apply for two years on one $60 hunting license?
sticksender
Active Member
- Messages
- 999
The expensive mandatory purchase of a NR hunting license rules out applying for elk in Idaho for me. Not complaining, that's just the result of the way their system is set up. Odds are just too slim for NR's. If I hunt elk there, it'll be on an OTC archery tag. As far as Idaho's limited hunts, I'll only apply for the OIL species. At least if you do draw, the money spent is more justifiable. I drew Moose a few years back and now I'll continue applying Goat or Sheep until I draw or die, whichever comes first. There are at least 6 other elk states (WY, MT, CO, NM, UT, AZ) where if you play your cards right, you can at least average drawing one decent elk tag a year from one of those, with any luck at all. With that in mind for my own purposes I can't rationalize applying for limited Elk hunts in Idaho.
clearwater150
Member
- Messages
- 75
My son and grandson are NRs and we hunt together every year. We have unsuccessfully applied as a party in a 'trophy' elk area a number of times (10 yrs and counting) and never have drawn. However, each year we plan to hunt in our 'regular' spot and we have a good ol' time anticipating and dreaming about the "what if" scenarios should we get lucky and draw the primo tags. Regardless, success or non success in the draw doesn't affect our enthusiasm for our annual elk hunt! When we don't draw we just go ahead and have a great time hunting together. We camp along a well used Forest road. Lots of folks hunt the same area, but perhaps not quite as hard as we do....and we always chase around a bunch of elk.....and we are even successful now and again! I don't really buy the argument that the process is unfair to NRs. If you plan to come to Idaho (or any state for that matter) to hunt elk, figure on a tough hunt.....then throw your name in the ring for one of the primo units as icing on the cake.....should you draw. Win or lose in the draw, go on and have a grand old time hunting. What a privilege it is to have the opportunity to hunt elk in Idaho where there is so much public land to hunt! Hearing all the whining about the "unfairness" of not getting to hunt a primo area is actually depressing as, to me, it is indicative of a profound cultural shift in the hunting public away from the joy of hunting and toward a focus on trophy kill. Do people think elk hunting has ever been easy with trophy bulls hanging in every aspen stand? It has always been a challenge to be successful let alone successful in bagging a bragging right trophy....just like it is in our general, OTC units today.
DownThePipe
Active Member
- Messages
- 233
LAST EDITED ON Jun-07-13 AT 08:43AM (MST)[p]Right on Clearwater. You have a realistic attitude.
Its not like its easy for residents to draw. I gave up applying for pronghorn after 10 years of trying because I figure I have to start the sheep quest sometime. It sucks, but there's no changing it. Fortunate to be able to buy an OTC (deer & elk)tag and get outside...
I am still an advocate for simple fixes, like only being able to apply for 2 out of 3 (elk, deer, pronghorn), a 2 year waiting period after drawing specific hard to draw areas, or even something like a +1 bonus point if you haven't drawn a species after 5 years. I know it takes money for IDFG to design/program(code) such systems, and they don't have it, but there are a few simple changes that would increase the drawing odds across the board.
Its not like its easy for residents to draw. I gave up applying for pronghorn after 10 years of trying because I figure I have to start the sheep quest sometime. It sucks, but there's no changing it. Fortunate to be able to buy an OTC (deer & elk)tag and get outside...
I am still an advocate for simple fixes, like only being able to apply for 2 out of 3 (elk, deer, pronghorn), a 2 year waiting period after drawing specific hard to draw areas, or even something like a +1 bonus point if you haven't drawn a species after 5 years. I know it takes money for IDFG to design/program(code) such systems, and they don't have it, but there are a few simple changes that would increase the drawing odds across the board.
I realize it's expensive for a nonresident to apply. Just like it is for an Idaho resident to apply in Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, or Nevada. It's expensive to be hunt as a nonresident anywhere. I'll never understand when a nonresident complains about being in the same pool as residents and no nonresidents draw. All that means is you had the exact same odds as everyone else and just didn't get lucky. What isn't fair is when non residents are guaranteed 10% which makes their odds better than the residents.
Idaho's 10% rule is as fair as it should be. Now, if the complaint is about tag costs, fishing license dates, or no points, I'm with you.
Idaho's 10% rule is as fair as it should be. Now, if the complaint is about tag costs, fishing license dates, or no points, I'm with you.
Don't mix Utah in there with costs because ifnyoundo it right it is very inexpensive to apply there. I applied there for the first time this year for deer and pronghorn and it cost me the same as it did to apply here in California! Now I know california is backwards but next year I can apply again in Utah and I don't have to buy a license unless I draw! How can Utah afford to do it this way? I'm not complaining just saying.
As to the whole 10% thing my view is from me as a mule deer hunter and may be different of an elk hunter. Lets say I want to hunt a controlled area that has bothe an early and a late season. Obviously the late season should be better than the early and will have fewer tags. But as a non resident it's hard to mark that as your first choice knowing that's your only chance! Could they change it up and make it a little like nevada to where they draw all the hunters then go through their choices til they get a tag or run out? It's ok to get your second choice. We have hunted our 5th many times in nevada and couldn't have been happier.
Like I have said before more years than not Idaho doesn't get any money from me simply due to they way they run the draw. And I know in not alone. You say that the department is broke. They leave money on the table every year
As to the whole 10% thing my view is from me as a mule deer hunter and may be different of an elk hunter. Lets say I want to hunt a controlled area that has bothe an early and a late season. Obviously the late season should be better than the early and will have fewer tags. But as a non resident it's hard to mark that as your first choice knowing that's your only chance! Could they change it up and make it a little like nevada to where they draw all the hunters then go through their choices til they get a tag or run out? It's ok to get your second choice. We have hunted our 5th many times in nevada and couldn't have been happier.
Like I have said before more years than not Idaho doesn't get any money from me simply due to they way they run the draw. And I know in not alone. You say that the department is broke. They leave money on the table every year
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.