fullthrottle
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,361
Wow 600+ non res tags went on sale dec 1st at midnight and were gone by 8:45 that morning. Crazy
Diamond creek elk
- Thread starter fullthrottle
- Start date
Non-Res is out of control. Wont be long before it's all draw for em. Counting the days myself. Idaho F&G needs to get it under control before it's to late, prices are to low, tags are to easy to obtain, and with the influx of residents it's becoming an unsustainable model.
I realize you're a non-res and your positivity is downright contagious, but it's coming. Prepare yourself. Idahoans have been giving F&G an earful and the massive influx of dipsh*ts to this wonderful state is exhausting. Its unsustainable. I'll say it again... trust me, it is coming.
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-18 AT 09:37PM (MST)[p]That's fine and I'm well prepared but again, how will converting it to a controlled hunt change things in a unit that is capped? The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is the waiting period will let others rotate in.
*Edit - I think they increased the waiting period from 1 to 2 years last year. It wasn?t a big step in increasing draw odds but it was theoretically.
*Edit - I think they increased the waiting period from 1 to 2 years last year. It wasn?t a big step in increasing draw odds but it was theoretically.
callsalot
Active Member
- Messages
- 689
I'm a non res also but the key here is this. His statement was the 600 non res tags went on sale so that leads me to believe that the res tags are unlimited. Idaho like much of the west has experienced a ton of growth so the resident population is growing and putting more pressure on the herds and the demand for non res is high allow the tag allocation is still the same. Also when tags go that fast it leads one to believe that these hunters will be seriously getting after it not just a last minute tag buyer to come for a few days. Just a thought.
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
Residents are also capped for this unit.
So what changes can NR?s expect besides converting it to a controlled hunt? That actually might help residents more because NR?s are not garunteed the 10% quota (just up to the set percentage). Will they reduce tag allocations? Did F&G convert the resident feedback to proposals the NR?s can look at for the sake of being better prepared?
So what changes can NR?s expect besides converting it to a controlled hunt? That actually might help residents more because NR?s are not garunteed the 10% quota (just up to the set percentage). Will they reduce tag allocations? Did F&G convert the resident feedback to proposals the NR?s can look at for the sake of being better prepared?
fullthrottle
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,361
Sounds like they are going to up the non res quota from 10 to 15 percent on the controlled tags. That would be sweet. Guess they figure they can make more money on the non res tags...
fullthrottle
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,361
Haha, come on... sounded good to me.
F&G does NOT want to turn capped elk zones for residents to draw. The commission has been fairly clear about that at past meetings, NR are a different story. More to come on this.....they are trying to figure out a way to reduce the demand on capped tags. Innovative things in the works.
BrianID
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,148
LAST EDITED ON Dec-05-18 AT 03:34PM (MST)[p]They should should switch to a controlled hunt for archery elk in Diamond Creek. Currently 643 of the archery tags go to nonresident and 1146 tags go residents. That results in 35.9% of the Diamond Creek archery tags for nonresidents which is more generous than it should be. Any nonresident that wants to complain about not getting a Diamond Creek archery tag for 2019 should keep their mouth closed and be thankful that Idaho is so generous in the nonresident quota. There are also the 47 "outfitter allocated" tags for Diamond Creek Archery which I'm sure mostly go to nonresidents, so nonresidents actually end up with closer to 37.5% of the Diamond Creek archery tags. If the 10% cap was implemented in Diamond Creek for archery, nonresidents would get about 178 tags and residents would get 1611 tags and there would still be 47 outfitter welfare tags.
I'm surprised residents have tolerated this as long as they have in Idaho. Might as well start giving 37% of the rifle tags to nonresidents in Diamond Creek as well.
The other advantage to having Diamond Creek controlled for archery is it would remove at least 2000 (possibly 3000) first choice applications for other units in the draw.
The downside to having Diamond Creek controlled is that it would displace some nonresident hunters into other general season units but that would be offset but residents not hunting other general season units because they would be in Diamond Creek instead. The Fish and Game wouldn't see any difference in review generated because there is already a cap on Nonresident elk tags and they have sold out all the nonresident tags the last few years. NET $$$ FOR F&G AND NET HUNTER DISPLACEMENT WOULD BE ZERO.
The only real losers with 10% quato are nonresidents who hunt Diamond Creek every year. If the nonresident is from Colorado (very generous state to nonresidents) then I feel bad for them. If the nonresident is from Utah or Nevada (lower than 35% of archery elk tags to nonresidents) then I don't feel bad for them.
With all that said, I'm currently a nonresident of Idaho and feel like a 10% cap is more than fair. I actually think all of Idaho archery tags should be capped at 10% for nonresidents. I killed a deer in Idaho, Wyoming and New Mexico in 2018. I should have killed an elk last year in Idaho with my bow but messed up a good opportunity and gave my brother (who is a resident) several good opportunities at OTC archery elk in Idaho. What isn't fair is guys like me who kill animals in multiple states every year and then complain that we don't get more tags.
I like having general season opportunity in Idaho but with the effectiveness of modern day hunters and our weapons, I think more and more controlled hunts are the future trend. The other option is to make Diamond Creek like the Weiser Zone and remove the quota.
I'm surprised residents have tolerated this as long as they have in Idaho. Might as well start giving 37% of the rifle tags to nonresidents in Diamond Creek as well.
The other advantage to having Diamond Creek controlled for archery is it would remove at least 2000 (possibly 3000) first choice applications for other units in the draw.
The downside to having Diamond Creek controlled is that it would displace some nonresident hunters into other general season units but that would be offset but residents not hunting other general season units because they would be in Diamond Creek instead. The Fish and Game wouldn't see any difference in review generated because there is already a cap on Nonresident elk tags and they have sold out all the nonresident tags the last few years. NET $$$ FOR F&G AND NET HUNTER DISPLACEMENT WOULD BE ZERO.
The only real losers with 10% quato are nonresidents who hunt Diamond Creek every year. If the nonresident is from Colorado (very generous state to nonresidents) then I feel bad for them. If the nonresident is from Utah or Nevada (lower than 35% of archery elk tags to nonresidents) then I don't feel bad for them.
With all that said, I'm currently a nonresident of Idaho and feel like a 10% cap is more than fair. I actually think all of Idaho archery tags should be capped at 10% for nonresidents. I killed a deer in Idaho, Wyoming and New Mexico in 2018. I should have killed an elk last year in Idaho with my bow but messed up a good opportunity and gave my brother (who is a resident) several good opportunities at OTC archery elk in Idaho. What isn't fair is guys like me who kill animals in multiple states every year and then complain that we don't get more tags.
I like having general season opportunity in Idaho but with the effectiveness of modern day hunters and our weapons, I think more and more controlled hunts are the future trend. The other option is to make Diamond Creek like the Weiser Zone and remove the quota.
BrianID
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,148
jested,
The total number of nonresident elk tags in Idaho hasn't been significantly increased or decreased in years. What has changed is more nonresidents are interested in archery hunting so the number of nonresident archery hunters has increased significantly in the last 30 years. The same is true for residents interest in archery hunting. 20 years ago the F&G tried to balance the overcrowding by creating the A tag/B tag system. I like OTC opportunities but I would personally prefer controlled tags for all elk in Idaho. I would rather have a quality experience every 2-5 years than deal with overcrowding opportunity every year but that is just my opinion. As long as it stays OTC, the crowding will get worse over time.
The economy has done well the last few years so the F&G has been able to sell out the Nonresident tags. If the economy does poorly in the future, I doubt Idaho will continue to sell out the nonresident quota without lowering the price. It was about 5 years ago that the economy wasn't doing as well so the F&G dropped the price for a 2nd tag in an attempt to maximize $$$. When the economy does well like it has, those guys with tags also have more financial freedom to spend time and money on hunting. It makes if feel like there are more tags but in reality is just more hunters in the mountains on any given day.
In my opinion the 2nd tag at nonresident price is a big problem. This gives a second tag to the most effective hunters in OTC units which already have elk that are highly pressured.
The total number of nonresident elk tags in Idaho hasn't been significantly increased or decreased in years. What has changed is more nonresidents are interested in archery hunting so the number of nonresident archery hunters has increased significantly in the last 30 years. The same is true for residents interest in archery hunting. 20 years ago the F&G tried to balance the overcrowding by creating the A tag/B tag system. I like OTC opportunities but I would personally prefer controlled tags for all elk in Idaho. I would rather have a quality experience every 2-5 years than deal with overcrowding opportunity every year but that is just my opinion. As long as it stays OTC, the crowding will get worse over time.
The economy has done well the last few years so the F&G has been able to sell out the Nonresident tags. If the economy does poorly in the future, I doubt Idaho will continue to sell out the nonresident quota without lowering the price. It was about 5 years ago that the economy wasn't doing as well so the F&G dropped the price for a 2nd tag in an attempt to maximize $$$. When the economy does well like it has, those guys with tags also have more financial freedom to spend time and money on hunting. It makes if feel like there are more tags but in reality is just more hunters in the mountains on any given day.
In my opinion the 2nd tag at nonresident price is a big problem. This gives a second tag to the most effective hunters in OTC units which already have elk that are highly pressured.
BrianID
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,148
LAST EDITED ON Dec-05-18 AT 08:15PM (MST)[p]Deerlove,,
Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of the Diamond Creek tags will not have any affect on how much money the Idaho F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless the economy tanks, Idaho will still sell out the statewide nonresident quota.
Do you think nonresidents should be entitled to 37.5% of the archery tags in Diamond Creek?
You have an argument if you are from Colorado and your state that gives out a very generous nonresident percentage of tags. If you are from just about any other state then you have no argument for nonresidents getting such a high percentage of the tags. Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico give out 37.5% of their archery elk tags to nonresidents?
Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of the Diamond Creek tags will not have any affect on how much money the Idaho F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless the economy tanks, Idaho will still sell out the statewide nonresident quota.
Do you think nonresidents should be entitled to 37.5% of the archery tags in Diamond Creek?
You have an argument if you are from Colorado and your state that gives out a very generous nonresident percentage of tags. If you are from just about any other state then you have no argument for nonresidents getting such a high percentage of the tags. Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico give out 37.5% of their archery elk tags to nonresidents?
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
If and when it's converted to controlled, I doubt most of the 450 NR'S (27.5%) will go elsewhere for archery tags. The exception would most likely be NR's that live close by. I think part of the reason success rates are so high is because these tags have been easy to get allowing individuals to consistently hunt and learn the area. That's such a huge advantage for any hunter. In addition, since they're putting up so much cash, some are probably more likely to come home with anything and not very picky. That's a pretty broad assumption though.
All in all, it'll be a bonus for residents via an additional 450 tags to help curtail the demand. A healthy chunk of the capped NR's that consistently tag out...will be out. Pressure will possibly be spread out as well and the opportunity for buying a second tag might return. I would assume a resident can more easily distribute their hunting time over the month whereas a NR would most likely hit it hard during the perceived prime time.
A year or two after its converted, I predict the controlled archery odds will be down to 15% for NR's. Definitely better than the rifle draws which are 1.8% and 7.2%. I've drawn both of those over the past 4 years.
With respect to this unit, none of this should be a surprise to anyone that can do math, has access to publications that suggest areas to hunt (Eastmans etc), or realizes the mess of a draw system the adjacent states have.
All in all, it'll be a bonus for residents via an additional 450 tags to help curtail the demand. A healthy chunk of the capped NR's that consistently tag out...will be out. Pressure will possibly be spread out as well and the opportunity for buying a second tag might return. I would assume a resident can more easily distribute their hunting time over the month whereas a NR would most likely hit it hard during the perceived prime time.
A year or two after its converted, I predict the controlled archery odds will be down to 15% for NR's. Definitely better than the rifle draws which are 1.8% and 7.2%. I've drawn both of those over the past 4 years.
With respect to this unit, none of this should be a surprise to anyone that can do math, has access to publications that suggest areas to hunt (Eastmans etc), or realizes the mess of a draw system the adjacent states have.
BPKHunter
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,744
These arguments are a damn merry go round, after 14 years on this forum.
It repeats because its relevant. The only thing that is factually true, is that the demand for tags like this aren't going down. Other states make it worse, so more folks come here. More NR's become R's with our population boom here.
Let's not forget that to make changes to our system, to our fee's, etc, the Legislature will get it's pound of flesh from F&G. That isn't good for sportsman most of the time, so change will come slower than anyone here or at F&G will like.
PS Word is F&G went back on changing the highest demand resident OTC hunt(Sawtooth), from a proposed new draw back to just capped. So that does support the argument that switching from the status quo is not easy.
It repeats because its relevant. The only thing that is factually true, is that the demand for tags like this aren't going down. Other states make it worse, so more folks come here. More NR's become R's with our population boom here.
Let's not forget that to make changes to our system, to our fee's, etc, the Legislature will get it's pound of flesh from F&G. That isn't good for sportsman most of the time, so change will come slower than anyone here or at F&G will like.
PS Word is F&G went back on changing the highest demand resident OTC hunt(Sawtooth), from a proposed new draw back to just capped. So that does support the argument that switching from the status quo is not easy.
i'm a resident and I think they need to do away with OTC deer and elk. I would like to see Unlimited first choice only for the "general season" I think it would cut down on the # of hunters using the General tags as a back up and would increase the draw odds for the more coveted tags.
changes should be coming in order to keep in front of the curve but I have my doubts that the commission will do anything before its too late.
changes should be coming in order to keep in front of the curve but I have my doubts that the commission will do anything before its too late.
Flatlander
Active Member
- Messages
- 156
There is no cap on NR OTC tags in AZ, so that argument sucks. And in ID, NR's contribute 50% of the overall funding for G&F so 37.5% does not seem an unreasonable allotment for OTC tags.
LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-18 AT 06:53PM (MST)[p]Flatlander... do some research, your un-educated on the topic. Arizona has OTC unlimited in very very very specific areas, with low densities. Residents of ID could care less that non-residents pay as much as they do...if its true supply and demand we would be charging double or triple.
Buckhunter1
Active Member
- Messages
- 569
Lots of Californians retiring and moving to Idaho...Lots of em hunt... get ready for some changes.. Bh1
tagsoup
Active Member
- Messages
- 945
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-05-18
>AT 08:15?PM (MST)
>
>Deerlove,,
>
>Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of
>the Diamond Creek tags will
>not have any affect on
>how much money the Idaho
>F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless
>the economy tanks, Idaho will
>still sell out the statewide
>nonresident quota.
>Do you think nonresidents should be
>entitled to 37.5% of the
>archery tags in Diamond Creek?
>
>
>You have an argument if you
>are from Colorado and your
>state that gives out a
>very generous nonresident percentage of
>tags. If you are from
>just about any other state
>then you have no argument
>for nonresidents getting such a
>high percentage of the tags.
>Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada
>and New Mexico give out
>37.5% of their archery elk
>tags to nonresidents?
I'm for WA where there is no nonresident quota. So whoever draws, draws doesn't matter weather you are a resident or nonresident. So that is what I am for in ID lol.
"Go hunt for meat at Walmart."
>AT 08:15?PM (MST)
>
>Deerlove,,
>
>Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of
>the Diamond Creek tags will
>not have any affect on
>how much money the Idaho
>F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless
>the economy tanks, Idaho will
>still sell out the statewide
>nonresident quota.
>Do you think nonresidents should be
>entitled to 37.5% of the
>archery tags in Diamond Creek?
>
>
>You have an argument if you
>are from Colorado and your
>state that gives out a
>very generous nonresident percentage of
>tags. If you are from
>just about any other state
>then you have no argument
>for nonresidents getting such a
>high percentage of the tags.
>Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada
>and New Mexico give out
>37.5% of their archery elk
>tags to nonresidents?
I'm for WA where there is no nonresident quota. So whoever draws, draws doesn't matter weather you are a resident or nonresident. So that is what I am for in ID lol.
"Go hunt for meat at Walmart."
Flatlander
Active Member
- Messages
- 156
>LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-18
>AT 06:53?PM (MST)
>
>Flatlander... do some research, your un-educated
>on the topic. Arizona has
>OTC unlimited in very very
>very specific areas, with low
>densities. Residents of ID could
>care less that non-residents pay
>as much as they do...if
>its true supply and demand
>we would be charging double
>or triple.
Hey jack wagon, I have been an AZ resident for 20+ years. I am pretty familiar with their system. I am also an ID lifetime license holder.
AZ?s otc archery deer tags are good for nearly the entire state and in many units run right through the rut. I am comparing AZ?s otc hunt structure and Idaho?s otc system. And there is no question, AZ is far more equitable to NR?s in these scenarios than ID. Arizona treats otc the same regardless of residency. So quit bitching, NR?s are paying way more than their share of the conservation costs in your state.
And if the limited otc tags sellout in 45 minutes, what do you care?
>AT 06:53?PM (MST)
>
>Flatlander... do some research, your un-educated
>on the topic. Arizona has
>OTC unlimited in very very
>very specific areas, with low
>densities. Residents of ID could
>care less that non-residents pay
>as much as they do...if
>its true supply and demand
>we would be charging double
>or triple.
Hey jack wagon, I have been an AZ resident for 20+ years. I am pretty familiar with their system. I am also an ID lifetime license holder.
AZ?s otc archery deer tags are good for nearly the entire state and in many units run right through the rut. I am comparing AZ?s otc hunt structure and Idaho?s otc system. And there is no question, AZ is far more equitable to NR?s in these scenarios than ID. Arizona treats otc the same regardless of residency. So quit bitching, NR?s are paying way more than their share of the conservation costs in your state.
And if the limited otc tags sellout in 45 minutes, what do you care?
BrianID
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,148
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-18 AT 10:31AM (MST)[p]Flat lander,
AZ gives nonresidents good opportunity with OTC deer but I can't get an OTC archery elk tag in AZ unit 1 or many of the other units in AZ. Why doesn't AZ give out 37.5% of the unit 1 archery elk tags to nonresidents?
AZ gives nonresidents good opportunity with OTC deer but I can't get an OTC archery elk tag in AZ unit 1 or many of the other units in AZ. Why doesn't AZ give out 37.5% of the unit 1 archery elk tags to nonresidents?
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
Can?t wait to get up there and shoot another Idaho elk. Better make it count since ?the end is near?.
http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2018/80514ea30913d2d134538b6754e3ca221b689.jpeg
http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2018/80514ea30913d2d134538b6754e3ca221b689.jpeg
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
LAST EDITED ON Dec-21-18 AT 04:57PM (MST)[p]Your inquiry about my age has no merit but definitely exemplifies the emotional gutter foam any thread on Monster Muleys turns into.
Moreover, you don't have to worry about me following the OHV regulations. More often than not, it's the entitled residents like these 5 guys blatantly and proudly violating the rules (with kids in tow to boot). Said individuals are the reason I have the right numbers handy at all times.
http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2018/11354ec536c6452924c65879b02421fb4f672.jpeg
Moreover, you don't have to worry about me following the OHV regulations. More often than not, it's the entitled residents like these 5 guys blatantly and proudly violating the rules (with kids in tow to boot). Said individuals are the reason I have the right numbers handy at all times.
http://www.monstermuleys.info/photos/user_photos_2018/11354ec536c6452924c65879b02421fb4f672.jpeg
>>LAST EDITED ON Dec-05-18
>>AT 08:15?PM (MST)
>>
>>Deerlove,,
>>
>>Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of
>>the Diamond Creek tags will
>>not have any affect on
>>how much money the Idaho
>>F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless
>>the economy tanks, Idaho will
>>still sell out the statewide
>>nonresident quota.
>>Do you think nonresidents should be
>>entitled to 37.5% of the
>>archery tags in Diamond Creek?
>>
>>
>>You have an argument if you
>>are from Colorado and your
>>state that gives out a
>>very generous nonresident percentage of
>>tags. If you are from
>>just about any other state
>>then you have no argument
>>for nonresidents getting such a
>>high percentage of the tags.
>>Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada
>>and New Mexico give out
>>37.5% of their archery elk
>>tags to nonresidents?
>
>
>I'm for WA where there is
>no nonresident quota. So
>whoever draws, draws doesn't matter
>weather you are a resident
>or nonresident. So that
>is what I am for
>in ID lol.
>
>"Go hunt for meat at Walmart."
>
Yes, but WA has a point system and a crappy one at that. Plus it is a pretty crappy state to hunt elk in.
>>AT 08:15?PM (MST)
>>
>>Deerlove,,
>>
>>Limiting the nonresidents to 10% of
>>the Diamond Creek tags will
>>not have any affect on
>>how much money the Idaho
>>F&G gets from nonresidents. Unless
>>the economy tanks, Idaho will
>>still sell out the statewide
>>nonresident quota.
>>Do you think nonresidents should be
>>entitled to 37.5% of the
>>archery tags in Diamond Creek?
>>
>>
>>You have an argument if you
>>are from Colorado and your
>>state that gives out a
>>very generous nonresident percentage of
>>tags. If you are from
>>just about any other state
>>then you have no argument
>>for nonresidents getting such a
>>high percentage of the tags.
>>Why don't Utah, Arizona, Nevada
>>and New Mexico give out
>>37.5% of their archery elk
>>tags to nonresidents?
>
>
>I'm for WA where there is
>no nonresident quota. So
>whoever draws, draws doesn't matter
>weather you are a resident
>or nonresident. So that
>is what I am for
>in ID lol.
>
>"Go hunt for meat at Walmart."
>
Yes, but WA has a point system and a crappy one at that. Plus it is a pretty crappy state to hunt elk in.
I have found Idaho F&G to respond very well. I took video of some guys last year and they used the video to catch up to the guys. Also I know of two tickets issued from trail cam pictures. Wyoming is another State that follows up very well. I know of a ticket issued from a YouTube video.
DZ
DZ
YZF_88
Member
- Messages
- 68
Like DZ, I've had great responses from them showing up to issue tickets. Most of the time it's been on the same day which is amazing given the amount of area they are responsible for. At the end of each year, I make it a point to write F&G and the Parks department officials a thank you letter with specific examples of the work put forth by field officers. They don't get the recognition they deserve. Their effort is progress and a big reason I continue to be a patron of Idaho.
IdahoInfidel
Active Member
- Messages
- 148
Easy Jetsled...these non residents are snowflakes.
Flatlander
Active Member
- Messages
- 156
AZ has the same cap on controlled hunts as ID. However this state offers far more opportunity to NR?s on any OTC tag, providing the same privileges to any NR who would like to come and pay the fees.
The anti-NR attitude that exists in ID is not prevalent here. I understand that most of this state is federal public lands so it's great that there is a way they can come enjoy them.
As far as swearing at me and griping about sharing the woods with me, you should worry more about the thousands of new ?Residents? joining the ranks every year. I'm an ID native with deep roots there, but am smart enough to see that the economy of the state can't support its substantial conservation needs without the support of lots and lots of NR dollars.
Good luck Jetbreath. And Brian, don't pretend that Diamondcreek is in anyway equivalent to Unit 1. There is no comparison.
The anti-NR attitude that exists in ID is not prevalent here. I understand that most of this state is federal public lands so it's great that there is a way they can come enjoy them.
As far as swearing at me and griping about sharing the woods with me, you should worry more about the thousands of new ?Residents? joining the ranks every year. I'm an ID native with deep roots there, but am smart enough to see that the economy of the state can't support its substantial conservation needs without the support of lots and lots of NR dollars.
Good luck Jetbreath. And Brian, don't pretend that Diamondcreek is in anyway equivalent to Unit 1. There is no comparison.
Flatbrim,
You've missed the point....again. Another arm chair expert from 1000 miles away claiming to be a "Native." Spend some time reading your Arizona regs on ELK, and specifically NR ELK. Then, sit back, and take a minute to enjoy a big bite of humble pie.
Merry Christmas,
Jet
You've missed the point....again. Another arm chair expert from 1000 miles away claiming to be a "Native." Spend some time reading your Arizona regs on ELK, and specifically NR ELK. Then, sit back, and take a minute to enjoy a big bite of humble pie.
Merry Christmas,
Jet
BrianID
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,148
Flatlander,
I agree that Diamond Creek is in no way comparable to Unit 1 AZ. Too bad every unit in the west isn't as good as some of the better units in AZ. I'm sure AZ residents would be upset if 37% of the unit 1 tags went to nonresidents.
Are you trying to argue that a year round season in a handful of units count as more opportunity? Trying to say AZ offers equal opportunity to nonresidents for OTC elk as Idaho is a joke and everyone knows it. The units for elk in AZ that are OTC for elk are managed to eliminate elk from the area,
The bottom line is that AZ caps nonresidents to 10% of their archery elk tags. Is it really unfair if Idaho were to cap nonresidents to 10% of the Diamond Creek tags? It wouldn't change how much money the Idaho F&G gets from nonresidents because as long as the economy is doing well, Idaho will continue to sell out the nonresident elk quota every year. So your argument for nonresident $$$ doesn't hold any water. I was raised and learned to hunt in Idaho and still hunt in Idaho almost every year but I'm currently a nonresident because of my career choice. Even as a nonresident I think a 10% cap is fair.
I agree that Diamond Creek is in no way comparable to Unit 1 AZ. Too bad every unit in the west isn't as good as some of the better units in AZ. I'm sure AZ residents would be upset if 37% of the unit 1 tags went to nonresidents.
Are you trying to argue that a year round season in a handful of units count as more opportunity? Trying to say AZ offers equal opportunity to nonresidents for OTC elk as Idaho is a joke and everyone knows it. The units for elk in AZ that are OTC for elk are managed to eliminate elk from the area,
The bottom line is that AZ caps nonresidents to 10% of their archery elk tags. Is it really unfair if Idaho were to cap nonresidents to 10% of the Diamond Creek tags? It wouldn't change how much money the Idaho F&G gets from nonresidents because as long as the economy is doing well, Idaho will continue to sell out the nonresident elk quota every year. So your argument for nonresident $$$ doesn't hold any water. I was raised and learned to hunt in Idaho and still hunt in Idaho almost every year but I'm currently a nonresident because of my career choice. Even as a nonresident I think a 10% cap is fair.
Flatlander
Active Member
- Messages
- 156
Nope, I don't think is unfair. My point is that these ID residents claiming that other states are stingy on NR?s is pretty uneducated. Claiming that an AZ resident has no right to gripe about caps is not valid.
Although here they do cap NR?s on limited entry tags, there is NO cap on any OTC hunt. You want to come here and buy a bear tag, go for it. Lions, sure. Hunt deer in the rut, sure just swing by Wal Mart and grab a tag. In some units on those hunts NR?s makeup WAY more than 37% of the total.
My point is just this, that each hint balances opportunity differently. I know I am comparing different species, but it's part of the total picture of NR opportunity.
I do get a good laugh out of residents griping about how fast the NR tags sold out, saying it's ?out of control? like it matters to them somehow.
As far as selling out NR tags, it was not that long ago that ID was reducing prices on second tags to help sell them. This is the best economic year in history. Don?t count on that being sustainable.
I hate the tone so many Idahoans take with respect to NR?s. Many have this my ##### don't stink attitude like Jetbreath. When the facts are that if the residents had to support the full weight of conservation they would cry like a stuck pig. Residents there have some of the most affordable tags in the west, and that's only possible because of what the NR?s bring to the state. But if you show up with an out of state plate you get subjected to all sorts of BS. It's like half the dang state has little man syndrome. As a 4th generation born and bread Idahoan it's embarrassing.
Ok, rant over.
Although here they do cap NR?s on limited entry tags, there is NO cap on any OTC hunt. You want to come here and buy a bear tag, go for it. Lions, sure. Hunt deer in the rut, sure just swing by Wal Mart and grab a tag. In some units on those hunts NR?s makeup WAY more than 37% of the total.
My point is just this, that each hint balances opportunity differently. I know I am comparing different species, but it's part of the total picture of NR opportunity.
I do get a good laugh out of residents griping about how fast the NR tags sold out, saying it's ?out of control? like it matters to them somehow.
As far as selling out NR tags, it was not that long ago that ID was reducing prices on second tags to help sell them. This is the best economic year in history. Don?t count on that being sustainable.
I hate the tone so many Idahoans take with respect to NR?s. Many have this my ##### don't stink attitude like Jetbreath. When the facts are that if the residents had to support the full weight of conservation they would cry like a stuck pig. Residents there have some of the most affordable tags in the west, and that's only possible because of what the NR?s bring to the state. But if you show up with an out of state plate you get subjected to all sorts of BS. It's like half the dang state has little man syndrome. As a 4th generation born and bread Idahoan it's embarrassing.
Ok, rant over.
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.