G&F August Meeting

[30inchbuck]

Well after several letters and emails the SFW is going to bring up the Q/HD rule at this meeting. The current feeling from the Dept. of Game & Fish is that they would like to go out and get public opinion and not let the commisioners sneak crap like this in like they did last year. There are a couple of commisioners that think this rule will actually do something to improve odds. Yet when you put actual numbers they cannot see that odds will only be improved in some areas and only for a couple of years. While most of the lesser units odds will get worse.

I know some of you guys like this idea but it will create a more and more problems - just like the problem with the Caldera now that they did not think of when they implemented this rule.

Going off the survey from here and another site is seems that 75% of you guys would like this rule to get abolished. We might need some help from you guys again. I will keep you informed of what happens at the meeting which will determine our course of action.

 

[ktc]

Abolish it! Tell me how to help.

 

[ColoradoOak]

I agree that the new rule stinks, but I don't think the commissioners "snuck" anything in. Wasn't it discussed ad nauseum here while it was still being considered? It's not the responsibility of the G&F to "go out and get public opinion", it's the responsibility of hunters to go to meetings and testify, send written comments, etc, before new rules are passed.

And don't count on some "group" that you pay $25 a year to do your dirty work. Too many hunters think that they can write a check, kick back, and everything will be peachy. We've got to be the most apathetic stakeholder group out there when it comes to natural resources issues.

Good luck in getting it overturned. It does nothing to achieve the stated goal, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

 

[RabidRattleSnake1]

The meeting is Albuquerque right on the 20th? Are they allowing public comment?

 

[WapitiBob]

There were no public meetings where it was discussed. They added the Q/HD verbage to a 2nd writing of the proposed 2009/2010 rules.
The Sept 2008 Commission Meeting agenda made no mention of the Q/HD rule.
The rule is also not shown in the "Elk Final Oct22008" rules draft.

 

[RabidRattleSnake1]

I have sent several emails and letters to the comissioners asking for them to explain how the rule will help those who are unlucky have a better chance in the future. I am sure you can guess the response I have recieved, NONE! The meeting is at 9:00 AM if I am not mistaken? I would love to go, but I have to work. I guess that is why they plan meeting for the middle of the week and the middle of the day.

 

[ColoradoOak]

>There were no public meetings where
>it was discussed. They added
>the Q/HD verbage to a
>2nd writing of the proposed
>2009/2010 rules.
>The Sept 2008 Commission Meeting agenda
>made no mention of the
>Q/HD rule.
>The rule is also not shown
>in the "Elk Final Oct22008"
>rules draft.

There was no Sept 2008 Commission meeting. This issue was originally brought up at the Oct. meeting in Alamogordo, and both a commissioner and a member of the public requested that a public comment period be opened before the commission voted on the issue. So the issue was deferred until the December meeting in Deming.

At the December meeting, it was stated that the proposal had been posted on the website for a month (there are no past agendas still posted on the website...do you have a copy?). There was lengthy discussion and public testimony at that meeting (only a handful of people testified in person). The commission ultimately passed the rule.

 

[JACOB2006]

WANT to increase the odds for everyone draw all first choice first

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Aug-13-09 AT 07:49PM (MST)[p]
>>There were no public meetings where
>>it was discussed. They added
>>the Q/HD verbage to a
>>2nd writing of the proposed
>>2009/2010 rules.
>>The Sept 2008 Commission Meeting agenda
>>made no mention of the
>>Q/HD rule.
>>The rule is also not shown
>>in the "Elk Final Oct22008"
>>rules draft.
>
>There was no Sept 2008 Commission
>meeting. This issue was
>originally brought up at the
>Oct. meeting in Alamogordo, and
>both a commissioner and a
>member of the public requested
>that a public comment period
>be opened before the commission
>voted on the issue.
>So the issue was deferred
>until the December meeting in
>Deming.
>
>At the December meeting, it was
>stated that the proposal had
>been posted on the website
>for a month (there are
>no past agendas still posted
>on the website...do you have
>a copy?). There was
>lengthy discussion and public testimony
>at that meeting (only a
>handful of people testified in
>person). The commission ultimately
>passed the rule.



UPDATE, I FOUND IT.

"Commissioner McClintic: I've been thinking about giving hunters a better chance of drawing for hunts in this state without
being elitist. If we can cut down the applications by 30%, not lose any revenue, and give sportsmen a better percentage
opportunity to draw and hunt, it's worth the effort. I want to require all license applications, both resident and non-resident for all hunts, be required to pay up front in addition to the application fee, full license fee, with hunters not drawing the license getting full license fee refunded. Also, all of our quality, high-demand hunts in this state because people complain they're so minimal, I'd like to incorporate into our regulations that if you draw a high-demand hunt this year, you're ineligible to apply next year. You have a 1-year waiting out period. It's not going to disqualify you from applying from all our other hunts. This is another way to make the odds better for drawing a quality, high-demand hunt. Item #6 says enable implementation of a birth-year bonus drawing enhancement program. I don't think that works because if you go over a 4-year period, 2 years you're going to have a 50% more chance, 2 years you're going to have a 50% less chance, so over a period of time, it's not going to benefit anybody over a 4-year stretch, so I want to eliminate that. I'd also like to strike #6.
Commissioner Simpson: These are all things that have been thrown out, they are sudden changes, and it?d be my preference
that you submit these in writing but that we defer them to the December meeting where we have more people. We need to give
the public the opportunity to look at the suggestions and comment."