Please post WHY you want to keep the Q/HD Rule in effect?!
I am strongly opposed to it for many reasons and honestly can't understand why people are for it.
Here are my reasons AGAINST.
I'm not trying to bash, just want some data as to why you are for it. Thus far the only reason I've heard for it are that "it will make it easier to draw" without any backup data or calcs. I looked at some numbers and don't see enough improvement to be worth having to sit out of the Q/HD draw hunts for a year.
Carl
-----------------------------------------------------
NM Game & Fish and NM Game Commission:
I appreciate that the Commission and Department seeks input from the public when considering changes to the current rules and regulations. I strongly believe that the Q/HD Rule (as defined to mean hunters who successfully draw a Q/HD tag may not apply for any Q/HD tag the following year) should not be implemented.
My feelings and analysis are based on Resident tag allocations and draw odds, as I feel that NM G&F should first and foremost be serving the Resident hunter?s needs.
As a side note, I do not believe that the term ?Quality? really serves much purpose except a way to charge non-residents more $ (I am unaware of any other western states that utilize similar terminology).
It is my understanding that the intent of the Q/HDR Rule was to placate hunters who complain they ?hadn't drawn in years, while Joe Hunter drew a tag for the past several years in a row?. While the intentions may have been noble, please find several reasons why I believe the Q/HD Rule simply does not make sense and is not in the best interest of NM sportsmen and women.
1. The first, and I feel, most compelling reason against the Q/HD Rule is that the elimination of successful applicants the following year may at best only provide a minimal increase for the odds of the remaining applicants. Take for instance a few popular hunts as follows, based on the NM G&F Draw Odds Report 2008-9 (note: statistics were evaluated for Residents only):
? Unit 15 ELK-2-237 (2nd Season Archery): 156 tags/1,166 applicants = 13.3% draw odds. The following year(s) if the 156 successful applicants were not allowed to apply: 156 tags/1,010 applicants = 15.4%. Net change 1.1% increase.
? Unit 16C ELK-1-264 (Mature Bull 1st Season Rifle): 39 tags/2,085 applicants = 1.8%. The following year(s) if the 39 successful applicants were not allowed to apply: 39 tags/2,046 applicants = 1.9%. Net change 0.1% increase.
? Unit 17 Elk-3-289 (Mature Bull 1st Season Muzzle): 76 tags/1,522 applicants = 4.9%. The following year(s) if the 76 successful applicants were not allowed to apply: 76 tags/1,446 applicants = 5.2%. Net change 0.3% increase.
As clearly evidenced, for the more popular hunts (which are the reason for the issue in the first place), removing the successful applicants from the pool increases odds only minimally for the remaining applicants. Meanwhile, the successful applicant would be unable to apply for any Q/HD hunt the following year, effectively making for draw odds of zero! The proposed rule hurts the successfully-drawn sportsmen far more than it helps the remaining applicants.
2. A large portion of the successfully-drawn hunters who become ineligible for any Q/HD hunts would likely apply for S hunts. Therefore, with the increase in the number of hunters applying for S hunts, it is not unreasonable to expect that many of the S hunts would receive enough NR applicants to exceed the NR quota and cause them to be classified as HD hunts, further exacerbating the problem as fewer and fewer S hunts remain as viable choices for previously-successful applicants.
3. Because a higher percentage of archery elk and deer hunts are classified as Q or HD (with Q only being an arbitrary definition), the rule does not affect all types of weapons equally. Bowhunters quickly find that after being drawn, they may be ineligible to apply for the majority of Archery hunts, while Muzzle and Rifle hunters would not be affected to the same extent. Because the Q/HD Rule is unfair, it should not be implemented.
4. Based on the NM G&F Draw Odds Report 2008-9, some of the Q archery deer hunts actually have leftover tags (see for instance DER-2-315/Unit 40 and DER-2-366/Unit 29). It makes no sense whatsoever to eliminate successful applicants from the pool the following year when there aren't even enough applicants for the number of tags!
5. The Q/HD Rule will have a detrimental effect on the Valles Caldera?s ability to generate revenue. Because the VC bull hunts are classified as Q, a large number of applicants would be ineligible to purchase lottery tags for the VC following a successful draw. I personally purchase at least $150 each year on lottery tickets and within just a close handful of friends know for a fact that we purchase in excess of $1,500 annually on VC lottery tickets, which would be revenue lost by the VC if we could not apply. At a time when the VC is scratching for the finances to become self sustaining, the Q/HD Rule may very well be a death blow.
I appreciate your diligent review of all comments received.
Carl
