Dishonest WY game play to get money from NR?

[elks96]

So here is what I just discovered. Looking at the Elk Special draw, the one that cost more I discovered that in Unit 22 here are the results...

022 1 ANY ELK 0 25 10 4

The 0 is the Quota and the 25 was 1st choice applicants. How can they allow hunters to apply for special draws when there is not even a tag available? Doesn't this seem a little deceiving...

Looking at the list there was nearly a 100 people who applied in the special draw for no tags at all...

Wonder if it is the same in Antelope and deer?

 

[RockyDog]

When you apply for just about any state this same situation arises. I feel people should be responsible for their own understanding of the units and regs.

 

[Triple_BB]

You probably need to reread the draw odds. Zero tags were drawn in the random draw for the special. Folks with points in the special had two tags allocated to them.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-12 AT 05:25PM (MST)[p]I would have to agree with Rockydog in that the way the system works you have to look at the units very closely and know the way the draws break down percentage wise and the number of tags issued in previous years by looking at previous years odds stats on the G&F website. In the unit the OP mentioned there were only 4 tags available and they went in the regular and special price PP draws. Due to the low number of tags available the other two random draws not involving PPs could not mathematically have any tags and yet many applied for no chance to draw. That means they either got a refund and weren't even in the running for a tag or may have received a second or third choice tag if they listed other units that had more tags than first choice applicants. It really requires that you look at what was offered in each unit the previous year and also check to see if they have changed the tag numbers if that stat comes out before the date comes when you can't go in and make a change. That would generally only apply to the antelope and deer drawings because the elk draw is done in January vefore those stats are available. You really need to know what you're doing to even have a chance of drawing a tag when very few tags are offered and I don't really call that deceiving.

 

[piper]

I agree,Its not the best way to treat appliciants,
In Utah they color the print to let nonresidents know if there is a tag available or not, in Nevada you know if there are any tags available to nonresidents, and in Colorado its easy to figure.

No doubt, Wyoming draw system is quite strange

 

[SouthernWyo]

How is it dishonest? The stats are right there for the whole world to see. Anyone that applies for a tag when the quota is zero deserves what they get.

 

[tkhunt]

There was nothing dishonest about how Wyoming does there draw system. Triple BB is was trying to tell you the original poster read the drawing stats wrong. He was looking at the RANDOM draw not the Special Draw with Preference. There were 2 tags given in this drawing for non residents. It was a simple mistake on reading the wrong draw stats.

 

[elks96]

Yes I did look at it wrong, but wouldn't a system that only allowed you to apply or tags that actually exist be a little better? I have the same issue with the DOW here in Colorado. They have OTC Antelope Archery Buck Tags in several units. When I looked at the units I knew of exactly 1 unit that has ever had an antelope. My home archery unit which I have hunted for 20+ years I have seen exactly 2 antelope. So again I feel it is deceitful to offer up a tag or the application for a tag that has no real opportunity of being drawn or if drawn that animal does not exist in the area at all... Sorry not meant at WY but the stats pages and the reporting system has a lot to be desired. I sure wished they would actually set quotas and publish quotas before we had to apply.

Yes I read only the random draw, truly I thought I was on the special draw.

 

[piper]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-12 AT 09:01PM (MST)[p] Was it 60/40 for elk and different in the antelope and deer draws? so if 60% of tags are for the random draw and 40% for the special, how can the special have two tags available and the none in the regular? seems strange to me.
I have read the draw odds report in Wyoming many times and its always confusing.
One year they gave people both points and a tag for elk, strange, In region H they gave 200 more buck tags to nonresidents than they were supposed to one year, right after a big winter kill,
I tell ya, its strange , and not very professional.

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-12 AT 10:17AM (MST)[p]"I sure wished they would actually set quotas and publish quotas before we had to apply."

They finalize that just before the correction period ends.

 

[chipc]

You have some good info here and yes, it can be confusing. You have to read carefully and know the system. However, most states have their details like this that can throw you off if you aren't careful. On a side note, I see that Eastman's has the terrain in Elk unit 22 listed as "moderate". I know I'm gettin' old and have a few extra pounds but if thats moderate I'd hate to see what rough is !

 

[elks96]

>You have some good info here
>and yes, it can be
>confusing. You have to read
>carefully and know the system.
>However, most states have their
>details like this that can
>throw you off if you
>aren't careful. On a side
>note, I see that Eastman's
>has the terrain in Elk
>unit 22 listed as "moderate".
>I know I'm gettin' old
>and have a few extra
>pounds but if thats moderate
>I'd hate to see what
>rough is !

No crap... I believe that a person could call the bottom of the mountain moderate. But the second you gain any elevation it is as steep and as nasty as any place I have been in Colorado. I believe the only thing going for it is the fact that the top is not that far off, just really hard to reach... I went up that mountain 2 times in one afternoon when I had that deer tag. That about killed me...

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-12 AT 12:46PM (MST)[p]I'd like to know where Eastmans is obtaining some of the so-called facts they put in their MRS section. Guy says in the magazine I just got that unit 2 (Fortification herd) has 75% BLM land and it's easily accessible and flat, open terrain, all of which are absolutely incorrect. He goes on to say that it may become one of the top and easiest elk units in which to kill a good bull in the near future. He's plain and simple full of chit!!!

 

[elks96]

>LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-12
>AT 12:46?PM (MST)
>
>I'd like to know where Eastmans
>is obtaining some of the
>so-called facts they put in
>their MRS section. Guy
>says in the magazine I
>just got that unit 2
>(Fortification herd) has 75% BLM
>land and it's easily accessible
>and flat, open terrain, all
>of which are absolutely incorrect.
> He goes on to
>say that it may become
>one of the top and
>easiest elk units in which
>to kill a good bull
>in the near future.
>He's plain and simple full
>of chit!!!

Sp do you have to pay to get this MRS information? Or is it part of the subscription? I have looked at their stuff, but I do tend to find the Eastman group some what honest and in terms of ethics, they seem to be pretty good about clean kills, reasonable ranges, etc. What d oyou think?

 

[chipc]

The MRS section comes as part of the subscription. I've been a subscriber for years and I enjoy their publication.I've never heard anything to dispute the notion that that are hard working ethical guys. However, as mentioned, some of their "information" is a real head scratcher.

 

[TOPGUN]

I get both their magazines and love to see and read about all the good animals people are taking with most of them being DIY hunts. That's about the only negative thing I could say about Eastmans in that they espouse DIY the eastman way on public land and they are leaning more and more to outfitted hunts on private property the last few years.

 

[DoeNob]

>I get both their magazines and
>love to see and read
>about all the good animals
>people are taking with most
>of them being DIY hunts.
> That's about the only
>negative thing I could say
>about Eastmans in that they
>espouse DIY the eastman way
>on public land and they
>are leaning more and more
>to outfitted hunts on private
>property the last few years.
>

That's because public hunting quality has been declining on several fronts and they think the viewers would rather see them hit up private than go public and compete with the orange army for a forkhorn.

 

[ColoradoOak]

>I have the same issue
>with the DOW here in
>Colorado. They have OTC Antelope
>Archery Buck Tags in several
>units. When I looked at
>the units I knew of
>exactly 1 unit that has
>ever had an antelope. My
>home archery unit which I
>have hunted for 20+ years
>I have seen exactly 2
>antelope. So again I feel
>it is deceitful to offer
>up a tag or the
>application for a tag that
>has no real opportunity of
>being drawn or if drawn
>that animal does not exist
>in the area at all...


That is not accurate at all. It may be the case for the units near where you live, but that OTC archery tag is good in all but 3 units of the eastern plains, where the majority of the pronghorn in the state reside. Take a look at the map on page 46 of the regulations.

I would much rather CPW include those units that are not be managed for pronghorn in the OTC license rather than having them completely off limits. There are giant bucks in some of those units, and it would be disappointing if there was no way for hunters to hunt them. Hopefully hunters would do some sort of advance preparation before assuming that there are huntable populations in all of those units. Maybe CPW could put one sentence in the regulations that says pronghorn populations may be very low or nonexistent in some OTC units. For the record, I've never hunted pronghorn with a bow in Colorado.

 

[TOPGUN]

"That's because public hunting quality has been declining on several fronts and they think the viewers would rather see them hit up private than go public and compete with the orange army for a forkhorn."

That may be true, but they seem to be doing what a lot of the other shows are doing now and that's promoting various guides and outfitters. I wonder if they are paying for thsoe hutns or if the promotion of the people on the shows is their payment. Eastmans has always promoted the DIY hunting in general hunt areas where everyone can get a tag easily and then tell everyone how to be successful doing it. I doubt that Grandpa Eastman would be real happy that they are going the way they are, even it's to keep the public happy, but for sure they are making a few bucks while doing it.

 

[MuskegMan]

I believe that's called a sellout TopGun.

 

[elks96]

You are correct on the eastern plains... However the mountain units they included are ridiculous... Really unit 42? The flat tops? While you would hope a person would research, it is also one of those things that person could easily look at and say hell I am hunting anyways why not have one. If there is not and has never really been a species of a said type in that unit for the last 20 years hen there should not be a tag for it. At least they cold do is note the units with no real chance of finding a lope... And at one point in the last couple of years it was only the mountains and not including the plains.

 

[ColoradoOak]

I'm guessing that if they had a problem with people buying a license to hunt areas with no pronghorn, then they would change the OTC areas. I am thankful that it appears there have not been that many ignorant people, and CPW hasn't felt the need to protect hunters from themselves with more strict rules.

>And at one point
>in the last couple of
>years it was only the
>mountains and not including the
>plains.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with this. The only changes in the OTC tag in the last several years is that it now excludes some mountain units (with pronghorn) that it used to include, including North and South Parks. It has been valid on the plains for as long as I can remember.

Anyway, I guess we will agree to disagree. I don't think they need to place more restrictions on hunters simply to keep them from trying to hunt pronghorn on Grand Mesa with their bows.

 

[ICMDEER]

Back to the original question. There are quite a few areas, especially for elk, that have heavy demands from nonresident landonwers. Each of those qualified nonresident landowners can get 2 landowner licenses for elk, deer and antelope. At the time the regs are printed and the quotas are set, the Game and Fish doesn't know how many landowner licenses will come "off the top." Some areas might only have 20-40 nonresident licenses, and landowners can easily take most or sometimes nearly all of those licenses. Makes it very tough for applicants to "guess" what's going to be available in the drawing.

I like to hunt in an area that only has 100 any elk licenses. So very few are available for nonresidents in the drawing because many to most of those licenses get snapped up by landowners. But it does vary from year to year. I know, if I owned the land, I'd be there every year, and so would most serious hunters. But that's not the case in reality.

Just FYI.

 

[BuzzH]

ICMDEER is correct.

What needs to change is there shouldnt be any landowner tags.

 

[nontypical]

Wouldn't bother me any.For sure the system needs to change at the very least.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

So how would you like it to be changed?