Food for thought

B

bulls1

Active Member
Messages
180
Well Jim, and Sean thanks alot. I guess I will get sucked into this argument, but this will be my only post on it.

From the 2010-2011 drawing odds report.

# of residents who applied for elk: 41,089
# of available resident elk tags: 16,400
# of guided non residents that drew tags: 1506
# of unguided non residents that drew tags: 2404
# of total elk tags available: 20,310
% of total tags drawn by residents: 80.7%
% of total tags unguided nonres: 11.8%
% of total tags guided nonres: 7.5%
% of residents who applied and drew: 39.9%

I would assume everyone is complaining for the sole reason that they can't draw a tag every year. This means we are already sitting some years out, no?
Go back to drawing 1st choice apps 1st. If there are tags left over after going through all 1st choices then move on to second choice and so on. This removes the meat hunters from the trophy units, and removes the trophy hunters from the meat units, follow me? This alone won't increase odds of drawing for the resident hunters in total. Everyone who drew an elk tag this year sets out next year, this includes non res both guided and unguided, but not youth. You can still apply for any species you did not draw this year. This also includes standard hunt codes not just Q/HD. You have just taken 16,400 people out of the draw for next year. New #'s

# of residents who applied for elk: 24,689
# of resident elk tags available: 16,400
% of residents who applied and drew: 66.4%

Yes this puts us back into the argument nobody could grasp last year. I understand you are going to recruit new hunters and such. The odds of some units are still going to be terrible. All the hunters that sat out this year will be back next (but the next 16,400 are out). With this in place most residents can draw there tag on a regular basis, and you don't have to take anything away from non residents, outfitters, or our economy.

Well there is my 2.5 cents

Jason
 
Jason,
Very good post, your thoughts work for me.

"Go back to drawing 1st choice apps 1st. If there are tags left over after going through all 1st choices then move on to second choice and so on."
I,m all for that, I can't even draw a 1st choice Antlerless hunt in 6c, it's been 5 years. I work with, and know people that draw it as a 3rd choice and refuse to go.

Thank you,
--Bill
 
Over the past 7 years applying in the NM Elk drawing, I have not even drawn a cow tag much less a bull tag. You still have that 33.6% chance of not drawing with the every other year draw system. There has to be a better system in place, maybe a system like that of utah where every body has to purchase a general hunting lisence before they can apply for the big game drawings to raise money for the GF dept. and for NM residents to recieve 90% of all big game tags not just antelope, Deer and Elk; this way the NM residents have a chance to draw just one tag in the drawing.
 
bulls1,

In your idea, would hunters who purchase a landowner tag and buy a license to hunt elk (or antelope or deer) be required to sit out the next year?

Gila
 
So 40% of residents apps drew elk. hmmmm. Sounds pretty fair to me.

Then you would like to goto a system where you will never draw a 15, 16 or 34 hunt cause you want to hunt and put in for 1st choice of 52 or something like that? At least with current system you can put in for a Q hunt as 1st choice then lesser unit for 2nd and a low unit as a 3rd choice with the possiblity of drawing something great but otherwise have better than a 50% chance of drawing an bull elk tag. Seen some that had a 100% odds and even was undersubcribed.

Or goto a points system and then possibly draw one or two quality tags in a lifetime? Like UT or AZ.



Outside of a horse is good for the inside of a man.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-26-11 AT 10:30PM (MST)[p]1st choice first sounds nice in principle, but i can't think of a formula that would calculate how it would positively affect any individual's odds...it would seem that many would still try for a 'premium' type tag as their first choice anyway, so i'm not sure it would effectively separate the 'meat' and 'trophy' hunters in practice

and i just don't see being able to muster a lot of support for the 'time out' period for successful applicants, regardless of the logic in the numbers...folks seem to view such suggestions with a great degree of skepticism, because apparently they focus on the fact that they 'could' become ineligible to draw any given year and rebel against that notion, as they almost invariably feel quite disadvantaged as it is

yes, it is rather backward thinking, but the tendency is prevalent

i've noticed that plenty of people complain about being denied opportunity of 'just getting to hunt', yet there are still undersubscribed hunt codes and leftover licenses!

just as in hunting, people have to be willing to put in the effort, do their homework, and maximize their chances at success by being willing to step outside their comfort zones to seek opportunity...and just like with hunting, there is also the element of plain ol Luck, but a 'persecuted' attitude certainly never helped anyone achieve anything except embitterment...the ones who do the least will NEVER be satisfied, and will kick and moan about it all their miserable lives

anyway, thanks for presenting your ideas Jason
 
Gila, As far as landowner tags I don't see any advantage in making them every other year. Landowner tags should be the next order of business. Do away with the SCR tags!! There are properties with 3 I repeat 3 acres who get a tag every year unit wide. Make one landowner list, prove you have elk on your property to get on the list. All landowner tags to be ranch only. It won't hurt the landowner who actually does any good for our elk herd. Unit wide tags were meant to compensate the rancher who has elk at different times of year other than hunting season. These ranches should have to call g&f and hold a depredation hunt. Preferably youth only. Either they except the dep hunt or they except the elk on their property! Of course this all hinges on repeal of the jennings law. Which is what everybody should be fighting for instead of a small increase in draw odds!!!

Dusty, Actually no, I won't be putting in for unit 52 ever. It's all yours buddy. Because if this happened I would draw my 16A first archery tag every other year. Every three if I had really bad luck. I would also get my unit 2B January archery tag every other year gauranteed. The fact is that yes there would be early rifle tags that you still may never draw. It's also a fact that your odds WOULD be better to draw it than they are now. Show me a better way to increase draw odds, keep the outfitters 12%, and put more kids in the field.
 
I've got a better idea.

Take all the unit wide landowner tags and put them back in the public draw where they belong since these tags belong to the public. Then we can all go elk hunting every year.

I don't have a problem with ranch only landowner tags, but I've got a big problem with a landowner of 40 acres getting an elk tag (many of them bull tags) valid for the entire unit.
 
>I've got a better idea.
>
>Take all the unit wide landowner
>tags and put them back
>in the public draw where
>they belong since these tags
>belong to the public.
>Then we can all go
>elk hunting every year.
>
>I don't have a problem with
>ranch only landowner tags, but
>I've got a big problem
>with a landowner of 40
>acres getting an elk tag
>(many of them bull tags)
>valid for the entire unit.
>
My point exactly. There was just shy of 3000 unit wide landowner tags last year. That alone would be a 17% increase in tags.
 
A little something for the archers to think about. Units 15,16,17,34,36, and 52 combined have 27 archery hunts. Only 7 of them are not a gauranteed every other year draw with the one year wait and drawing by choice. Out of those 7 hunts the worst draw odds you would have would be 25%, and that would be 16d third season.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 09:27AM (MST)[p]Pay attention eveyone!! This is what we've all been waiting for!

Please - Keep posts ON TOPIC, don't muddy the water.

Top 5 Highlights:

1) Draw all 1st choice first
2) Mandatory 1 year layoff for lottery draw to prior year's successful hunters.
3) Landowner tags are NOT included in this. This is ONLY about the lotery draw tags.
4) Caldera Raffle Tags are NOT included. .
5) Theoretically you could hunt elk every year by either Drawing lottery tag every other year, getting lucky with the raffle tags, OR buying a landowner tag.

If you post your knee jerk reaction with random babbling, you will only blurr everyone's vision. Sort of like information overload or as I like to call it... getting fed by a fire hydrant.

Jason & I have spent hours upon hours studying the draw odds reports (I save them to my hard drive every year in Excel).

We have read hundreds of forumn posts on this topic & we have spoken to pretty much every hunter we know.

Bulls1 has just presented us with the absolute BEST solution for ALL OF US to draw tags MORE OFTEN (Much more often in most all cases)!!

We need as many people on board as possible in order to get this done. I am willing to discuss over the phone or in person all of the math that proves this system will make a huge improvement to drawing odds, AND help everyone draw what they really want!

Send me a PM anytime you are willing to talk & you have my word that that I will "LISTEN" & be open to all thoughts you may have. The best solution would be for us to all meet in person, I know that's not possible for the Non-residents, however phone calls are better than an internet forumn.

Sean Hill
Farmington, NM



"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
>So 40% of residents apps drew
>elk. hmmmm. Sounds pretty fair
>to me.
>
>Then you would like to goto
>a system where you will
>never draw a 15, 16
>or 34 hunt cause you
>want to hunt and put
>in for 1st choice of
>52 or something like that?
>At least with current system
>you can put in for
>a Q hunt as 1st
>choice then lesser unit for
>2nd and a low unit
>as a 3rd choice with
>the possiblity of drawing something
>great but otherwise have better
>than a 50% chance of
>drawing an bull elk tag.
>Seen some that had a
>100% odds and even was
>undersubcribed.
>
>Or goto a points system and
>then possibly draw one or
>two quality tags in a
>lifetime? Like UT or AZ.
>
>
>
>
>Outside of a horse is good
>for the inside of a
>man.
_____________________________________________________

Dusty... Call me & I will be happy to enlighten you.




"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
Here is a challenge for all NM residents. Go to the nmdgf 2010-2011 draw odds. Take all three of your elk and deer choices, treat them all as though they were your 1st choice. Find the # of resident tags drawn and divide it by the total # of applicants. These are your current draw odds. Now take the # of tags drawn and subtract it from # of 1st choice applicants. Divide # of tags drawn by this #. These would be your new draw odds. Please post them up. We do not need to know which unit, just the numbers.

My 2010 elk odds
1st choice 23%
2nd choice 31%
3rd choice 39%

My 2010 deer odds
1st choice 10%
2nd choice 12%
3rd choice 05%

New draw odds elk
1st choice 100%
2nd choice 100%
3rd choice 100%

New draw odds deer
1st choice 58%
2nd choice 29%
3rd choice 11%

What this means is some units will take a huge jump in draw odds while others will be much more modest. Will I change what I apply for? Probably not since I will be hunting 16A every other year and 2b deer on the average of every three. Will other people change? Sure they will. When they see that their 2nd or 3rd choice just became gauranteed. If it wasn't a hunt they were willing to take in the 1st place it wouldn't have been on their app. Will some people still set and wait the 10 years it will take to get that 2c deer tag? Sure they will, more power to them at least they aren't waiting 20.

Jason
 
I agree with drawing first choice first, but it does not make sense to sit out a year in every unit. THERE ARE LEFT OVER DEER TAGS. There would be nobody putting in for some units the next year. Yeah would this be good in some unit and some hunts YEAH, but not all units and all hunts. It would make some odds for people go from 100% then 0% then 100% then 0% every other year, when these are people that could have 100% then 100% then 100% then 100% because they are putting in for unit to get drawn out in, because they want to go hunting and don't care about getting the Biggest Elk in the World when they go out.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 01:35PM (MST)[p]>I agree with drawing first choice
>first, but it does not
>make sense to sit out
>a year in every unit.
>THERE ARE LEFT OVER DEER
>TAGS. There would be nobody
>putting in for some units
>the next year. Yeah would
>this be good in some
>unit and some hunts YEAH,
>but not all units and
>all hunts. It would make
>some odds for people go
>from 100% then 0% then
>100% then 0% every other
>year, when these are people
>that could have 100% then
>100% then 100% then 100%
>because they are putting in
>for unit to get drawn
>out in, because they want
>to go hunting and don't
>care about getting the Biggest
>Elk in the World when
>they go out.


Can you put up the #'s from the hunts you applied for last year?

I agree there are details that would have to be worked out. What are your suggestions? Possibly only Q/HD set out for deer?
Possibly youth that draw Q/HD have to put in for standard hunts the following year? Exclude Barbary, bighorn, ibex, and oryx? Maybe let that unit that doesn't have enough applicants rest, in hopes that it helps our deer herds? Go back to weapon specific apps, meaning if you use rifle 1st choice all choices must be rifle for that species, and so on?

Give us some input beyond just, I don't like that because it doesn't help me.

Jason
 
If any of you non residents would like to post the current and proposed draw odds on your hunts, I would love to see them too. Please specify whether they are guided or unguided. Again we don't need to see unit #'s or hunt codes. Just draw odds.

Jason
 
Very good thinking Jason and Sean and thanks for posting up ideas. Sean I will give you a ring. Jim
 
Jason/Sean - I like the ideas being presented here. The only thing I might suggest is that all tags for undersubscribed units go into a secondary draw that is open to:

1) Applicants that were unsuccessful in the primary draw
2) Applicants that couldnt participate in the primary draw because they drew a tag the previous year.

Michael
 
I'd like to see the landowner tags go to like a 500acre min. I think the unit wide tags would be better and only give the ranch only tags in those units with over 75% private land or ranches with over like 50,000 acres.They want tags open up there ranch.Problem with ranch only is if there near hard hunted areas those elk will got to the ranches with limited pressure.If the ranches are smart they can keep them elk on there ranch easier then public land.Some food and water those elk and deer are staying on that ranch.Some great areas could be opened up if they are forced to give more for those tags.They get there tags for damage from animals but none will let hunters on to help with that problem for free.So They play the system and make money on tags ,leases to outfitters or selling hunts themselves.There is a reason alot more trophy bulls are taken on private ground and that could be changed.Some great hunting could be opened up in state that is already awesome.Plus they should need to really prove elk and deer use there land and that they are helping the wildlife also to get there tags.Just my thoughts
 
>Jason/Sean - I like the ideas
>being presented here. The only
>thing I might suggest is
>that all tags for undersubscribed
>units go into a secondary
>draw that is open to:
>
>
>1) Applicants that were unsuccessful in
>the primary draw
>2) Applicants that couldnt participate in
>the primary draw because they
>drew a tag the previous
>year.
>
>Michael


Excellent! Love that plan.

Billc,

The landowner tags will be a whole nother fight. I think everyone will agree that you can't do anything about the LO problem, until you get the jennings law repealed. Right now in this legislative session you have a bill that can be amended to address tag allocation.

Jason
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 03:13PM (MST)[p]>Jason/Sean - I like the ideas
>being presented here. The only
>thing I might suggest is
>that all tags for undersubscribed
>units go into a secondary
>draw that is open to:
>
>
>1) Applicants that were unsuccessful in
>the primary draw
>2) Applicants that couldnt participate in
>the primary draw because they
>drew a tag the previous
>year.
>
>Michael
_________________________________

Glad you asked!
Answer:
All under subscribed hunts will be sold on the intranet first come first served. Tag allocation will be distributed 40% to youth only & 60% to everyone else, including hunters who drew the prior year.
(The only way you can hunt the Elk two years in a row are: 1)buy a landowner tag, 2)Win a Caldera raffle tag, 3)Purchase one of the secondary sale tags on the G&F website.)

Sean

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
Non-resident - Unguided

I didn't have the 2010 numbers on my hard drive so I just used the 2009 numbers. Not perfect, but it really shouldn't matter for demonstration purposes.

My 2010 elk odds
1st choice 0.40%
2nd choice 0.54%
3rd choice 4.97%

My 2010 deer odds
1st choice 0.11%
2nd choice 2.09%
3rd choice 36.21%

New draw odds elk
1st choice 0.64%
2nd choice 1.49%
3rd choice 29.03%

New draw odds deer
1st choice 0.17%
2nd choice 4.06%
3rd choice 80.00%

That looks great at first glance, but there would be a LOT of folks that currently use the system the way it is, that would change the way they apply.

The current system doesn't penalize you for trying to draw the premium units first. If it did, folks would change the way they are applying so your 100% odds for your units would not be accurate at all. I would immediately change my 1st choice to my 3rd choice units along with about 1/2 the folks who are applying and your odds are out the window.

Seems crazy to me that you would put a unit down with worse odds for your 3rd choice than your 1st and 2nd choices like you did. Just a waste of a choice really. I think that is one of the biggest issues is the number of folks that just don't really understand the way the draw works.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 03:48PM (MST)[p]>Non-resident - Unguided
>
>I didn't have the 2010 numbers
>on my hard drive so
>I just used the 2009
>numbers. Not perfect, but
>it really shouldn't matter for
>demonstration purposes.
>
>My 2010 elk odds
>1st choice 0.40%
>2nd choice 0.54%
>3rd choice 4.97%
>
>My 2010 deer odds
>1st choice 0.11%
>2nd choice 2.09%
>3rd choice 36.21%
>
>New draw odds elk
>1st choice 0.64%
>2nd choice 1.49%
>3rd choice 29.03%
>
>New draw odds deer
>1st choice 0.17%
>2nd choice 4.06%
>3rd choice 80.00%
>
>That looks great at first glance,
>but there would be a
>LOT of folks that currently
>use the system the way
>it is, that would change
>the way they apply.
>
>The current system doesn't penalize you
>for trying to draw the
>premium units first. If
>it did, folks would change
>the way they are applying
>so your 100% odds for
>your units would not be
>accurate at all. I
>would immediately change my 1st
>choice to my 3rd choice
>units along with about 1/2
>the folks who are applying
>and your odds are out
>the window.
>
>Seems crazy to me that you
>would put a unit down
>with worse odds for your
>3rd choice than your 1st
>and 2nd choices like you
>did. Just a waste
>of a choice really.
>I think that is one
>of the biggest issues is
>the number of folks that
>just don't really understand the
>way the draw works.
_________________________________--

You MUST take into consideration the # of tags available in the fist place. Nonresident Unguided is the smallest pool of all.

16D 1st rifle only had FIVE (5) tags allocated for you as a Nonresident unguided and 871 1st Choice applicants. That is 0.5% odds, taking the 5 out for next year will not improve these odds much. Nothing you can do will ever give 871 hunters a chance at 5 tags other than prayer.

Please consider that even in this "WORST CASE SCENARIO" it does in fact increase the odds by 99.4% (0.0057405/0.0057736)=0.994 or 99.4%. The problem is that your odds are so low in the first place it is hope & a prayer no mater what.

For the Guided Nonresidents, their real life chances to draw increase dramatically. For Residents the improvement is even more.

The bottom line is this, The only people who have to sit out are the ones who drew the prior year & in your case they will probably sit out for 25+ years without drawing the way it is today anyhow. With this change you MUST admit that although fairly insignifigant, your odds DO IN FACT increase and we have not taken anything away from anyone.

Please explain what you mean about who put in for lower odds on their 2nd & 3rd choice.

Are you on board or what?

Sean

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
>Please explain what you mean about who put in for lower odds >on their 2nd & 3rd choice.

Bulls1 was who I was talking about.

My 2010 deer odds
1st choice 10%
2nd choice 12%
3rd choice 05%

I always try to stack my choices so that the % gets better with each choice. His 3rd choice was pretty much wasted.

I will admit that the odds would appear to improve if the system was changed to 1st choice only, just not as dramatically as you are thinking, especially on the higher odds units.
 
Billc - please stay on topic. Landowner tags are not a part of this. Voice your opinion on landowner tags in a seperate post.

I will say that before any of us start trying to do someing to change the landowner tag allocation system, WE MUST get rid of the Jennings Law. This must happen first.

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 04:17PM (MST)[p]>Can you put up the #'s from the
>hunts you applied for last year?

>I agree there are details
>that would have to be worked out What
>are your suggestions? Possibly
>only Q/HD set out for deer?
>Possibly youth that draw Q/HD
>have to put in for standard hunts
>the following year? Exclude
>Barbary, bighorn, ibex, and oryx?
>Maybe let that unit that doesn't
>have enough applicants rest, in
>hopes that it helps our deer
>herds? Go back to weapon specific
>apps, meaning if you use rifle
>1st choice all choices must be
>rifle for that species, and so on?

>Give us some input beyond just,
>I don't like that because it
>doesn't help me.

>Jason

I would have to look at exactly what the numbers where, but look at the deer odds and you will see that there are units that have 100% odds. They may not be the best deer unit out there for the monster buck, but people have a great time hunting them. You will also notice that some of these are Q/HD because they are during the rut so that still wouldn't help. I think that youth hunters should have twice the chance to draw a hunt. When they put there app in it counts as two chances for them. As far as weapon specific that doesn't do anything, but limit people to shooting a riffle or a bow rather then being a sports man who has spent the time practicing with both(take pride in being able to shot everything). I took my nephew hunting in Unit 43 for elk because when I was putting him in I asked do you want to hunt or do you want to see more elk if you do draw out knowing your odds will be low on drawing out. He just wanted to hunt so we went to 43 and didn't see a single elk, but he had a great time just being out there with the chance to see and kill an elk. He was talking about putting in for that hunt again don't take that away from people that just want to hunt.

As far as suggestions like I said I like the draw your first choice then go back in the pool.
I think youth should have twice the chance. (I love the youth hunts they have made, wish they were there when I was growing up.)
I think elk is the bigger concern for everyone then the deer are (except the 2's)
You shouldn't mind having to wait a year if you draw a tag of a lifetime, like the 16's for elk(I drew a once in a lifetime oryx hunt and I am not crying because I don't get to go on range again.)
Game and Fish needs to look at number of tags in general and see if to many are being given out in certain areas.(O I don't know this might drop some peoples odds down by a .02%.)
Here is another suggestion stop putting in for the tags of a lifetime, if you are going to cry about not drawing.
Look at what is being called a Q hunt if you are going to make those people sit out a year.

Sorry for being so worried about myself and the other meat hunters out there. I love the taste of deer and elk and anything else that is wild. I get mad when people complain about not getting drawn when they put in for the cream of the crop. I told my brother in law when he couldn't draw out to put in for lesser hunts because he was mad saying that I always draw. He took my advise and was able to draw a tag and was able to harvest a deer.

I love the hunt, I love the chase, and that is why they call it hunting not killing.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 04:33PM (MST)[p]>>Please explain what you mean about who put in for lower odds >on their 2nd & 3rd choice.
>
>Bulls1 was who I was talking
>about.
>
>My 2010 deer odds
>1st choice 10%
>2nd choice 12%
>3rd choice 05%
>
>I always try to stack my
>choices so that the %
>gets better with each choice.
> His 3rd choice was
>pretty much wasted.
>
>I will admit that the odds
>would appear to improve if
>the system was changed to
>1st choice only, just not
>as dramatically as you are
>thinking, especially on the higher
>odds units.
__________________________________________________

I'll let Jason speak for himself, but I have done the same thing intentionally before and here's why: I wanted my 1st choice & thats all that really mattered to me. 2nd choice was a hunt I would have been happy to go on, 3rd choice was because there was room on the application & it had a chance, very slim chance, but a chance none the less.

We are who we are, we want to hunt where we want to hunt. I see no sense worrying about things I can't control. How other people apply is one of the things I can't control & it's really none of my business anyway, so why worry about it?

Drawing all 1st choices first WILL change the dynamics of how people apply because the odds for drawing 2nd & 3rd choice will be reduced dramatically.

Remember... You have to GIVE in order to GET! Giving up odds for 2nd & 3rd choices in order to improve 1st choice is good for everyone, because the odds of drawing what you truly want go up.


"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
live4muleys:

I like the way you think! You are a part of the majority & I share many of your opinions.

Drawing 1st choice first in conjunction with a mandatory layoff in the lottery for the same species the following year should be for every species & every hunt code, yes this includes meat hunts & youth hunts. STOP! Think! Keep reading/listening!

Undersubscribed tags will go on sale to first come first served, 40% of those will go to youth, the other 60% go to whoever has the fastest internet connection & typing skills.

PLUS we keep the "Youth Encouragement" hunts in place.

ALL of the internet-first come-first served tags may be purchased by anyone including those that hunted the year before. These two opportunities will allow our youth to hunt every year (at least for elk), they just need someone to take them!



"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
npaden, I put my deer app in that way because I really wanted to hunt with my bow. My first and second choices were the two archery hunts that I really wanted. Put the third choice down as a wing and a prayer, and drew it. Last rifle hunt in 2b, miracles do happen. I had a ball on that hunt, but took the tag from someone else who had it as a first choice on their app. I agree that there is no way you can acuratly predict what the odds will be. All I am trying to do is figure out how the tags could be distributed in the most equitable manner.


"Sorry for being so worried about myself and the other meat hunters out there. I love the taste of deer and elk and anything else that is wild. I get mad when people complain about not getting drawn when they put in for the cream of the crop. I told my brother in law when he couldn't draw out to put in for lesser hunts because he was mad saying that I always draw. He took my advise and was able to draw a tag and was able to harvest a deer."

Live4muleys, I can't agree with you more about people crying because they can't draw a sargeants elk tag. I also agree that there needs to be the oppurtunity for our children to hunt EVERY year. A secondary draw will allow a lot of people to hunt every year if they are willing to hunt the units you talk about. A person can also buy a landowner cow tag which are usually reasonably priced when you look at the overall cost of hunting. I also laugh at the people who won't put in any where other than their back yard unit. Throw some more suggestions out there.

Jason
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 05:26PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 05:19?PM (MST)

Fast Facts:

Unit 2 Deer overall odds will increase by the following.

Resident: 15.668 to 18.579
Nonresident unguided: 12.729 to 14.586
Nonresident Guided: 31.190 to 45.328


Before anyone complains that "those are still crappy odds", I remind you that this is one of the hardest units to draw in the state! Once we make the change to drawing 1st choice 1st, people will figure out that if they really need to think about where they truly want to go hunt for deer and put that unit as their 1st choice. I strongly feel that the number of 1st choice applicants for unit 2 deer will decrease and thus improve the odds even further.

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-27-11 AT 05:53PM (MST)[p]ha! ok Gambler, i will try to keep my random, knee-jerk babbling under control for ya ;)

Thanks for providing your equation Jason, but i do believe it is a bit oversimplified and idealist...like i said initially, it sounds nice, but i am not convinced of how exactly it would improve the odds of any single application getting drawn

I have a suggestion of compromise with regard to the 'time out' proposal for successful applicants: what about only those that draw their 1st choice becoming ineligible to apply the following year? also include a 'blank' hunt code option for applicants who are not interested in 'premium' tags to use as their first 'choice'

i'll let the numbers wizards do the math, but this would seem to provide more people better odds at the 'trophy' type units, while not necessarily penalizing the bread and butter 'meat' hunters except by reducing their actual hunt choices from 3 to 2

eh?
 
Sorry there gambler the man who started the post said something about landowner tags here also.I like the first choice system make a few people rethink how the apply.I was also just thinking some landowner tags with what I said would go back it the reg. pool of tags.I"d like everyone to have there first choice before going to the second and so on.That seems like a good idea to me.I still think sitting out a year when you draw a tag would have people hunting ever few years instead of some people going with out a tag for years on end.You would still have a chance to draw any tag you did not draw just sit out for the animal you drew.For those that do not want to sit out the landowner tags are still there to buy will just cost more to hunt that year.There maybe also away for people who draw a high qualty tag to wait for like 2 years to try for a high qty.tag again.But let them draw for a unit that are not high qty for any season.Like you can only draw a unit 13,15,17 34,any of the 16's every 3 years but would not have to sit out any years for a reg tag.The units would just need to be picked as which ones you could only draw once ever 3 years.I just hope people who do not hunt don't get to try and fix this.The sportsman that pay the way just get alot of say on how this works out.
 
oh great one, you sure have a low opinion of resident hunters.

you can make it as complicated as you want, but the easiest and best solution is to reduce the nr tags to 10% total.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-26-11
>AT 10:30?PM (MST)
>
>1st choice first sounds nice in
>principle, but i can't think
>of a formula that would
>calculate how it would positively
>affect any individual's odds...it would
>seem that many would still
>try for a 'premium' type
>tag as their first choice
>anyway, so i'm not sure
>it would effectively separate the
>'meat' and 'trophy' hunters in
>practice
>
>and i just don't see being
>able to muster a lot
>of support for the 'time
>out' period for successful applicants,
>regardless of the logic in
>the numbers...folks seem to view
>such suggestions with a great
>degree of skepticism, because apparently
>they focus on the fact
>that they 'could' become ineligible
>to draw any given year
>and rebel against that notion,
>as they almost invariably feel
>quite disadvantaged as it is
>
>
>yes, it is rather backward thinking,
>but the tendency is prevalent
>
>
>i've noticed that plenty of people
>complain about being denied opportunity
>of 'just getting to hunt',
>yet there are still undersubscribed
>hunt codes and leftover licenses!
>
>
>just as in hunting, people have
>to be willing to put
>in the effort, do their
>homework, and maximize their chances
>at success by being willing
>to step outside their comfort
>zones to seek opportunity...and just
>like with hunting, there is
>also the element of plain
>ol Luck, but a 'persecuted'
>attitude certainly never helped anyone
>achieve anything except embitterment...the ones
>who do the least will
>NEVER be satisfied, and will
>kick and moan about it
>all their miserable lives
>
>anyway, thanks for presenting your ideas
>Jason
----------------------------------------------------------------

Greatwestern, I like the way you think.

You are basically correct - Drawing 1st choice 1st does not increase the odds by itself. It does not change the number of tags, nor does it change the number of people who apply, one or both of these two things must change in order to honestly increase drawing odds. What it does is it forces everyone to make different choices than they are currently making. We will all have to choose each year if we want to trophy hunt or meat hunt. This will cause a redistribution of odds, some hunt codes will improve, but some will get worse. In a way it is robbing Peter to pay Paul. The reason I am all for this is because if we can get this instituted WITH the mandatory 1 year layoff for successful hunters, we now have a dramatic improvement in drawing odds for ALL hunt codes because we just made a dramatic reduction in the number of applicants. These two seperate topics must go together. Doing so we will all draw what we truly want more often. Fact.

You are also right about the fact that getting people to sit out a year "after they draw a tag" has been and will be an uphill battle. What these people need to realize is the fact that we are all sitting out a heck of a lot longer now without this rule. That is the reason why I don't understand why people just don't get it. They complain about not drawing a tag for 10 years, 14 years, etc. BUT they are not willing to sit out ONE year - AFTER they successfully drew a tag! Really? Come on people, get your head out of the sand! This rule really would let us ALL go hunt more often. Period.

Isn't this what we all want?

Jason & I can not get this done by ourselves. We need your help, do we have your voice?

Hypocrisy exists in the space between language and action. I am ready and willing to take action. Are you?

Sean

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-28-11 AT 00:50AM (MST)[p]I think you're going to get a points system whether you like it or not.
 
Bulls and Gambler......I'm ok with the every other year thing as we typically have to wait and wait anyway.....but I am wondering if you guys think that going to a choice by choice draw will better odds by much without it.

I'm hoping that a cap on the 10% and 12% pools along with choice by choice could be a huge help to residents. What are your thoughts without a every other year....will it help some, a lot, or not much at all? In other words, is the every other year allocation critical to the this situation?

Again thanks for your out of the box thinking. Jim
 
>Bulls and Gambler......I'm ok with the
>every other year thing as
>we typically have to wait
>and wait anyway.....but I am
>wondering if you guys think
>that going to a choice
>by choice draw will better
>odds by much without it.
>
>
>I'm hoping that a cap on
>the 10% and 12% pools
>along with choice by choice
>could be a huge help
>to residents. What are your
>thoughts without a every other
>year....will it help some, a
>lot, or not much at
>all? In other words, is
>the every other year allocation
>critical to the this situation?
>
>
>Again thanks for your out of
>the box thinking. Jim


Yes Jim, It is critical to helping raise draw odds. Without the one year wait odds will not change at all. You have to take some of the 41,089 resident apps out of the draw. Otherwise You can draw any way you want and you are not doing anything, other than moving them around. Going to 1st choice 1st without doing anything else really helps nobody. It will change odds for certain hunts, but some of those changes will be in the wrong direction.

Jason
 
Yes odds will get better even if we go to a first choice only without every other year.Take your first choice and divide it by first choice apps only.Bet your odds go up 30 to 50 %.Try it please before you knock it.
 
>Yes odds will get better even
>if we go to a
>first choice only without every
>other year.Take your first choice
>and divide it by first
>choice apps only.Bet your odds
>go up 30 to 50
>%.Try it please before you
>knock it.


There are only two things that can make odds go up across the board.
1. Supply goes up
2. Demand goes down
If your odds went up 30 to 50% someone elses went down by the same margin. The only thing I am trying to do with this post is to show that there are ways to improve our current system. This can be accomplished without taking away the 12% outfitter pool. Taking away the outfitter pool won't help enough people draw a tag. At least not enough to make it worth the economic impact. I agree with others that as a resident I can hunt every year if I want to. The savvy resident will still be able to do that even with the one year wait.

Jason
 
If you are so inclined, you can download the draw stats that show if a hunt was drawn with a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice. It won't do you any good though, because you will never know how many of the successful 2nd and 3rd choice guys were removed from the 1st choice pool for a given hunt.

The only way to know what your odds really are, is to go 1st choice only till all 1st choices are filled.
 
I think a lot of people are missing one of the facts of sitting out a year.It would only be for the animals you have drawn.It would not mean you would not be able to hunt.Maybe elk one year deer the next.Or one of the other many animals opened for hunting.The only place sitting out a year might not help is in those very limit areas with low tag numbers.But if you apply for them you know going in it would be tough.Guys are talking about not drawing a tag in 5 years or more so what is so bad about sitting out a year or even two.I would still like to see some of the high demand units go to a two year wait in between tags.I would also like the idea if the unit is high demand for one week it is high demand for the whole season in that unit.Use the extra money from that to grow the wildlife pop. If the animals are trophy size for that one week I am sure they are for the whole season.High demand should not be just because of a prime week but by the quailty of animals there to hunt.I would also think lic. could go up some to bring in some extra cash to help wildlife pop. grow. take non res up to like 850.00 and res to 150.00 for elk and same increace with deer.Would like to see the youth season tags come down some so more may get there kids into hunting.
 
Thats what I'm saying lets say you have a unit with 120 tags 20 go to nonres so we're down to 100.Now we've got 300 first choice 300 second and 300 third.Best draw odds would be guessed at 1 in 8 with some of second and third drawing other units on their first pick.BUT if all first choices are drawen first your odds are one in three.How does that not improve odds for everyone?Sure you'r second or third odds suck but don't most people put their first choice where they want to go anyway?
 
I like this idea alot more than cutting the nonres tags and agree that it seems to makes the most change for draw odds. I would think most hunters would be fine with sitting out a year if they could draw a quality hunt more often and the fact that you could still get an undersubscribed hunt after the draw would still let a lot of guys hunt every year thus a win win.
 
I have a great idea,
Since the residents are the ones (obviously not all of them ) complaining of not drawing tags and needing better odds, maybe just the successful residents sit out a year. The non residents seem to be just fine with never drawing a tag.
 
I prefer the current lottery system now. Win some you lose some.
I wish they would, however, bring back the weapons specific hunts.
You want to hunt with a bow, you only apply for bowhunts, etc.
 
>I prefer the current lottery system
>now. Win some you lose
>some.
>I wish they would, however, bring
>back the weapons specific hunts.
>
>You want to hunt with a
>bow, you only apply for
>bowhunts, etc.
_________________________________________________

Done.

I agree 100% that each application needs to be weapon specific. This will be added to our proposal.

Thanks.




"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
I appreciate the passion around this, but I really think, you might want to ponder on the 1st choice pool, 2nd choice pool etc.
This was NM's initial drawing setup, without the mandatory year off, but with the weapons specific. We also had more tags and bigger units.
We lobbied, cussed and discussed and swung the pendulum too far in the opposite direction. I think the 1st choice pool, 2nd choice pool will just swing us back too far again.

I firmly believe making the hunter choose his only weapon will open up alot of opportunity for more people. They will be competing only in "their pool".
The true lottery system we have now, is as level a playing field, as there is.
If anything I believe I have been more succesful, in drawing tags, since we went to this true lottery.


You know, in the big picture, adjusting the draw odds, is just a diversion from the real issue. We got grow more animals, it doesn't matter what the draw odds are, if there aren't any animals, nobody is going to be hunting.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-11 AT 07:29PM (MST)[p]>You know, in the big picture,
>adjusting the draw odds, is
>just a diversion from the
>real issue. We got grow
>more animals, it doesn't matter
>what the draw odds are,
>if there aren't any animals,
>nobody is going to be
>hunting.
_____________________________________

I agree with you about "growing more animals, but I think you meant "killing", because people will still be "hunting".


There are far too many tags allocated in some units for the number of huntable animals in my opinion, BUT I do not have the hard data to back this up, it is only my personal observation/opinion.

Example: Unit 2's deer population sure does seem to be declining and yet the # of tags allocated has not been reduced.

There are many possible things that can contribute to lower populations. i.e. - excessive predation, overhunting, habitat loss or degredation, sickness or disease, competition with other animals, etc.

All of this is a seperate topic. This topic/post (in a nutshell) is only about increasing the frequency of drawing tags and improving opportunity to go hunting in New Mexico.



"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
I agree with you about "growing more animals, but I think you meant "killing", because people will still be "hunting".

Other than putting words in my mouth. I have no idea what you meant by that statement. I meant "Grow more deer".

As far as the topic of the thread, the whole top portion was associated to the topic.

I don't like the 1st choice pool, 2nd choice pool, 3rd choice pool and manditory year off.

I think adding the weapons specific application, to the current lottery system we have now, would give us the best opportunity there is. My opinion.

I had no idea on the population decline, thanks for the education. I have only lived in Farmington since the 1960's. I sure thought I would have noticed that.

Tag allocation has dropped drastically in the past 10-15 years, up until 1998 you could still buy over the counter ML tags here.
 
Don't take offense, I am not attacking you in any way.

I did not put words in your mouth... this is what you posted, "We got grow more animals, it doesn't matter what the draw odds are, if there aren't any animals, nobody is going to be hunting."

I was agreeing with you with a little bit of sarcasm aimed at the G&F department because they have done aerial surveys where they only saw 5 deer in an entire unit and did not reduce the number of tags in that unit just a few years ago. Hence the correction from "hunting to killing" or in context.. "not killing". My point is that deer & elk counting surveys are flawed due to the silly grid patterns they have to fly which may cause them to miss prime habitat and the fact that on top of this, the number of tags allocated are not being issued with enough consideraton from the bioligists who do the surveys, who I know have made recomendations for fewer tags, but their recomendations have fallen on deaf ears.

I am well aware of the way things were, you forgot to include the OTC archery tags that still existed about that time.

I spend a pretty fair amount of time in unit 2 and I'm telling you... I'm not seeing the numbers of deer or the deer sign in the last two years that I used to see in decades past. Soooo... all I'm saying is "I have noticed much less deer & deer sign in unit 2".

Mathematically weapon specific applications will not improve drawing odds across the board because it does not change the demand for 1st choice hunts. This is back to the basic supply & demand noted above. However I do agree, for other reasons, that we should go to weapon specific applications.

I hope this helps clarify our misunderstanding. I will try and be less vague in the future.

"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
I am not taking offense. Some of your comments just don't make any sense.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the application selection process. I think your proposal is too drastic and wholeheartedly disagree with it. I am very happy with the current process, add in a couple of tweaks, and it's even better.

Like I said before, I can appreciate your passion, we're all in the same boat of wanting better hunting. Our desired paths to achieve that goal just differ.

There are many people that study draw odds, deer numbers, water sources, range degradation religously, you are not on an island.

We have alot more in common than you think.
 
imo i don't think the system is so bad.everyone keeps complaining and g&f might give us something alot worse like az. & utah where you get a tag every 10 yrs. or more.just my opinon
 
Now that I live in New Mexico may I chime in on something that Alaska did. For some of the big demand tags (Tok Management Area, Delta Junction) for Dall Sheep, some of the bison hunts, and grizzly hunts on Kodiak; if you drew one of those tags you couldn't put in for it again for at least 4 years for the same unit. Alaska didn't do point and they had only 3 hunts choices per species. So it does give others a chance to get drawn for the tag, mind you these weren't once in a lifetime hunts either. Just an opinion for what it is worth.
WVBOWAK
 
As an nr I really like this, when Montana had this I was able to hunt every other year. If two or three states did this most hunters could hunt every year, one year in one state,the next in another state.
 
>As an nr I really like
>this, when Montana had this
>I was able to hunt
>every other year. If two
>or three states did this
>most hunters could hunt every
>year, one year in one
>state,the next in another state.
>
_____________________________________________________

Thank you, I consider your personal results as proof that this will work, and it will NOT have a negative financial impact to our state.




"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
>I agree with drawing first choice
>first, but it does not
>make sense to sit out
>a year in every unit.
>THERE ARE LEFT OVER DEER
>TAGS. There would be nobody
>putting in for some units
>the next year. Yeah would
>this be good in some
>unit and some hunts YEAH,
>but not all units and
>all hunts. It would make
>some odds for people go
>from 100% then 0% then
>100% then 0% every other
>year, when these are people
>that could have 100% then
>100% then 100% then 100%
>because they are putting in
>for unit to get drawn
>out in, because they want
>to go hunting and don't
>care about getting the Biggest
>Elk in the World when
>they go out.
______________________________________________________

live4muleys, this issue is solved by putting all undersubscribed hunts for sale online as first come first served. These hunts will be available to everyone, including people who drew a tag the prior year. That way if you are one of the hunters who puts in for the guaranteed draw hunts, you can still hunt every year.





"Windage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
This plan bulls1 (and crew) put together, couldn't be any more effecient and better for your state of NM and us non-residents in my opinion. Thanks for taking the time to post your plan, and you should run for the next NM Fish and Game director. Haha!
 
>This plan bulls1 (and crew) put
>together, couldn't be any more
>effecient and better for your
>state of NM and us
>non-residents in my opinion.
>Thanks for taking the time
>to post your plan, and
>you should run for the
>next NM Fish and Game
>director. Haha!


Thank you, but it seems there are very few of us that agree. Unfortunatly I didn't contribute enough to our governors campaign fund to be considered for the commission as they are all appointed positions.

Jason
 

Similar threads

BGnight
Elko CAB meeting NR shed season
Replies
10
Views
764
GONHUNTIN
G
B
Central Coast Tule Elk Hunt Info
Replies
2
Views
595
Buckmiser
Buckmiser
H
Last minute meeting to change Co tag allocation
Replies
12
Views
2k
Joe2Kool
Joe2Kool

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Hanging antler1 - Copy.jpg
E196B78C-E047-4D7A-AD82-6CE5D963BE10.jpeg
20190204_125833.jpg
Big Buck for tikkamike!
IMG_4495.jpeg
331736CC-2A54-4D4C-AF1F-B916F80C846D.jpeg
1F1DCB69-5ECC-476A-9FD6-30C31469C4AE.jpeg
IMG_3152.JPG
General Utah Buck for JakeH
72B05219-C03C-4203-92F5-5317414AAB14.jpeg
DSCN3100.JPG
IMG_4522.jpeg

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom