Oregon Non-resident tags

W

wmidbrook

Guest
Hey, I just noticed that Oregon only issued not 5%, but a measly 1% of the tags issued for one of the mule deer hunts I'm interested in.

So, the regulations state that "up to 5%" of the Oregon tags go to non-residents.

Also, the archery tag I put in for last year, non-residents ended up getting 3% of the tags.....any other non-residentslook into whether the hunt they put in for got a full 5% of the tags like the regs would like you to think????

I don't know about you, but I'm feeling a little screwed over by Oregon right now.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-05 AT 04:12PM (MST)[p]Yeah, it'd be nice to be given a "head's up" when jumping into the point game there (to the tune of about $100/year) about what units Oregon state wildlife officials are going to make less than 5%.

It's also nice how they seem to be doing this the most in their so called 'quality' or 'high demand' units.

Oregon's a great state. Has some good hunting. I've got family that has hunted it since the 1920s. I started hunting it in '98 when I worked in Portland. But, it makes it rough on non-residents not having a firm allocation of tags when signing up for a system that requires you to buy a license every year to gather the points to hunt the units you want to hunt.

Gee, Mr. SalesMan, I've never heard of the "bait and switch" tactic before...You mean if I sign up for this point deal I'll draw the tag I want in 3 years?"...yes, okay I'll buy it.....

Then the rules change on ya and they tell you it may take up to 15 years to draw 'cause they changed the rules on ya....not a very good deal....not very good PR either.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-14-05 AT 04:15PM (MST)[p]Now that would work out right 75% of the tags go to people with preference points so if you add it all up of the 3 tags that went to Non-residents that is 75% of the non-resident tags issued now the remaining 25% of the total tags left go into the general draw so anyone can get a tag.
Look at Hunt 168A that hunt only has 52 tags available well do the math there Oregon went over the 5% there because to get 3 tags there had to be 60 tags issued it all works out in the end

Look at hunt 171M also it only has 10 tags and a Non-resident tag was issued there so that is a 10% to Non-residents.

That list you are looking at is for the 75% list not the entire 100% list guys that is only 3/4 of the tags issued for that imparticular unit. So it is actually extremly accurate. Once you get to the general draw if the 5% is already taken like in the trout creeks or Juniper or one of the other hunts after the first 75% then a tag is not available to Non resident with fewer points. but Hart had enough tags that it had a tag go into the general draw pool of all first choice applicants.

Dave
 
Oregon does make it difficult for non-residents to draw some of the best tags, but I don't think you have any reason to complain. If you look in the regulations, they clearly state the procedures they use in the drawing, and they clearly state that no more than 5% of the deer and elk tags will go to non-residents. It then says "Less than this maximum percentage may be issued, as nonresident applications receive no preference, other than exisisting preference points, in the drawings."

One thing that hasn't been mentioned, and maybe you're not aware of it, is that the outfitters are given 1/2 of the 5% for many of the most popular units. These are so their clients will have a guaranteed tag. This I don't agree with. It's like welfare for outfitters. If you look on page 18 of the 2005 hunting regulations, under "Guides and Outfitters," you will see where it says "A number of tags equal to one-half the nonresident tags drawn the previous year are available through this program."

So, in reality, nonresidents who are not hunting with an outfitter, will only get approximately 2 1/2 percent of the tags for most of the good units. But again, you really shouldn't be complaining because the ODFW tells you all this right up front.
 
Actually, outfitters get 1/2 of the total, but it is usually more in the more desireable units. So the 1% in some units may be right. Oregon is far worse to nonresidents than any other state. You would really be better off just buying the raffle tickets. The only reason I might even consider buying the Oregon license to enter the draw is that nonresident quotas in the future are totally up in the air now and the points might be worth something in the future. I am not complaining, just stating why I do not enter the Oregon draw. Again, it could change...........
 
Well, I appreciate the added info.

The point system isn't fully explained in the preference point section like you'd think making it easy to skip over the outfitter section. Reminds me of IRS regulations--if it ain't the EZ Form, gotta go to the pro's to get it done or spend a ton of time figuring it all out--and time is one thing I don't have a whole lot of these days....lol....who does?

But, it does sound like a good opportunity to put in for the draw through outfitters...worth looking into some more.

Anyway, it does have some bearing on draw strategies knowing that the prime Oregon hunts are much more difficult to draw for the DIY non-resident hunter unless you put in through an outfitter.
 
Yes it is a little confusing if you don't completely read everything. Even then it can be confusing. One thing you should also be aware of...I believe the price of the tag is double if you go through an outfitter.
 
That is correct if you are in the Guide and Outfitter tag program you have to pay double for the tags and then you have to have them all sold by April 15th or they go back into the Draw. Amazing how it is almost exactly the same as the Nevada Program except the Guides get to market the tags and not have clients fork out the 300plus dollars to apply. Additionall if you get one of these tags you keep all of your preference points in Oregon also. I like this program a whole lot better then nevadas. instead of having 250 different people with each guide applying for the Same tags. YOu only have Guides who have the permits to guide in those units in the tag draw not guides from all over the state chasing certain tags.
Dave
 
NV is in a mess. They had the guide draw (based on last years nonresident quota), but do not know what they are going to do about nonresident/resident tag distribution until after the regular draw application deadline. Anyway, Oregon is in the 9th district too, yet still is going with the ultra stingy 5% nonresident cap, half of that or so to the guides. What is happening to AZ and NV is wrong, but 5% is way too tight too. Perhaps upping it a bit might help avoid the AZ/NV situation? I bet if AZ would have comprimised a bit too, perhaps the situation would not be as bad now. I really feel 20% nonresident is the best comprimise all around.
 
I personally feel the state of Oregon has every right to limit nonresidents any way they choose, but I have often wondered why George Taulman (USO Outfitters) hasn't gone after Oregon yet. Sure seems they would be a likely target. I suppose he wants to deal with Montana first, then Idaho, maybe Oregon is next on his list.
 
George and His USO guides do not want Oregon it does not have several hundred 400 inch bulls and countless 200" deer running around. He cannot get the Federal Permits for the North East part of the state. Then the state really does him good with the fact that landowners can only hunt on there land. not unit wide like in alot of states. He cannot get a permit for the Wenaha wilderness and places like that where oregon's best bulls are the list for those permits is over 20 people long Believe me i am on those lists and I can tell you for a fact that there will be Lawsuits that you have never seen if George got a permit before some of the other guides. Plus tag numbers in the premier units are extremly limited. So why would he wants to haul his ass to Oregon Whom does not even have a rifle Rut hunt in the state that is halfway decent.
 
You gotta be crappin me. You mean if a point holder applies through an outfitter and draws one year, he retains all his preference points for future regular draw applications? If so, the 2 1/2% unguided quota gets further watered down.

These games played by the states are just rediculous, and then they think average joe won't notice. :(
 
Just remember, what you think Oregon has the right to do means nothing. It is what the judges and politicians think that matters. Once a precident is set, it should apply everywhere or nowhere. If NV and AZ are forced into something bad, forcing everyone else into it too is fairer than just discriminating against those two states. And a lawsuit by someone else would be easier too. If you want to stick your heads in the sand and ignore it, O.K.. I really do not care what Oregon does, am just bringing up a point. Ignore it if you want.
 
I live in Oregon and the point system may not be the best but with our high property taxes I feel we should have the best chance to draw a tag. Not trying to step on toes here but I feel all the states should limit the non resident tags or raise the tag $$$.
 
I really think the 5% limit is reasonable, IF half of those weren't given to outfitters for their clients.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-05 AT 12:42PM (MST)[p]In some cases outfitters get almost all the non-resident tags.

Take a look at the 2004 N. Warner deer hunt. Out of 104 tags, non-residents in the regular draw got 1 tag. That's a lot less than 5% which would be 5 tags. At that rate, joe non-resident who cannot afford outfitter tags will take 50+ years to draw it....

So, Oregon should make it very clear to non-residents that quality and high demand areas will be much tougher to draw than what it would seem on the surface....that's not clearly stated anyway---why? it's a $$$ thing possibly.

So, it seems somewhat underhanded to me that it would not be clearly communicated to non-residents that this is the case. I think it's intentionally not made clear for $$$ reasons--oregon wants to sell licenses to non-residents..probably a good chunk of money.
 
It appears that Oregon has a "cap" system and if they are in the 9th circuit states, they will not be able to run 2005 with a cap in place based upon the decision the court took in the USO case...... Thanks, Allen Taylor......
 
Now there is a fine line in this one i just found Out Oregon's State Constitution has a provision in it about the number of Non-resident hunters who can be awarded in the state. Not a fish and Game law. Now Regulations versus a state constitution are 2 areas that are real tuff to judge However I would probabally say that this may happen. But it could get interesting because it is hard as hell to mess with a states constitution. Kind of like that assisted suicide law and stuff like that with Oregon. Oregon won in the Federal courts on that because it was an amendment to the Constitution. So there is your fine line. Arizona and Nevada and a bunch of other states do not have wildlife mandates in there constitution. So lets just see how it plays out could get very very interesting.

As far as Oregon's 5% I would love to see it go to 10 or 20% means more people who do not know the country will be here but with oregons point deal being as long as it is with top pool being 12 points this year and several thousand residents having more then 5 points be several years before this would even impact us here. Due to the 75% allotted to the points and the 25% put into a general draw. It will be several years before this legislation really takes effect. Plus the only real unit that nonresidents could have an impact against residents are at the Juniper Muzzleloader, Trout Creek mountains, and Maybe the North Warner Muzzleloader. Only the absolute elite tags otherwise the Residents will still have a 3 to 5 to 1 ratio.
Dave
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-05 AT 05:01PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-05 AT 04:55?PM (MST)

The data simply does not add up. I've saved the last 3 years worth of draw data---mathematically, oregon is not following the published rules--it's statistically impossible.

You won't see any non-residents below the max point pool (that 25% of the tags you keep talking about) allocated to those with less than the max points for non-resident.

Nor is Nevada following their published rules.

The year 2002, unguided non-residents in Nevada got far less than the earmarked number of tags in the NE units--sure, residents took a hit too but not the same percentage hit....in fact, NV broke their rule of "10% will go to non-residents" provision. And in fact, people complaining about this got their money back.


Also, if these agencies were held accountable through an audit by a neutral third party, you'd find a lot of shenanigans going on. But, I highly doubt that there is anyone doing an audit on their draw programs.

This point system is corrupt in more than 1 state.

I've heard allegations from someone I bumped into the field in NM that he draws every year because the guy who programmed the draw system did a "little favor" for his buddies so that they always will draw--this happens with gaming systems in Nevada all the time and they have an investigative unit auditing the computer systems in NV all the time......but, who audits the Draw systems for big game???
 
OK maybe I will come off a little brash here but come on, there is so much in this world we cannot change! And for those who it affects they get all bent out of shape and act like there whole world is coming to an end!!!! Yes, some states are not fair for non-residents but you choose where you want to live!!! Before I hurt to many feelings, I too get mad about not being able to hunt some states for years on end but, the way I look at it is that's tough luck, I can live with it.This is part of the problem now days if some one feels they are cheated they sue. This is getting way out of hand. Life is tough live with it...
I don't want to make everyone mad I'm just saying every system is not going to be perfect. It seems like this world is going to hell in a hand bag because people don't let things be if they effect those people in an ill way... Grow up, I cannot afford to go hunting in Mexico do you here me crying to lower the prices. NO I'M JUST SAVING FOR IT, and once I can afford it I will go..
Sorry to vent
Curtis
Besides Oregon is not a good place to hunt anyway. ;-)
 
It really does not matter what we think. Whatever is going to happen is up to the lawers, judges and politicians now. The only thing that is fair is that every state gets the exact same treatment by the feds.
 
Oregon has this cap but if you take a close look at some not all units you will see that we are fair.Do other states put somewhere around 25% of the tags back into the pool so that ALL have a chance, even with 0 points? Do you really want to see the non resident tag fees go up? because if people push this issue then I would bet that ODFW will raise the price to hunt our state. Heck some states are so high its impossible for the average joe hunter to even think about ever going there. Oregon does not have great bucks or bulls so look at another state...wont hurt our feelings.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom