Idaho Bonus Points Slipped into Bill

[HNTBIGBULLS]

Jake, Yea let them keep raising the
Non resident fees, but by hell don't
mess with the residents, right!

And lets not award them Non residents
any better chances at drawing tags, but
keep taking there money year after year.

Some of you must not play the points
game in other states, because believe
me , I feel alot better applying for tags
that I know I have a better chance than a guy
with less points, because I have paid my dues.

Point systems work!

Yes the whole deal is getting into it from
the begining, Just like anything else, If
a new big company is coming to your home
town, and you apply for the job, and are
hired the day they open, Do you think that
if they hire someone 10 years after you
started, that person should start out
with the same seniority that you have?

Everybody has there opinions, but a person
must look at what is best for everyone, not
just themselves, which is one of the
biggest problems with this country right
now.

 

[springbear]

"Everybody has there opinions, but a person
must look at what is best for everyone, not
just themselves, which is one of the
biggest problems with this country right
now"

What a load of crap. You want points so that YOU have a better chance at drawing the tag over EVERYBODY else.

Another thing, You and many others use this multiple year thing as an excuse... Oh, poor me, I have put in and "donated" XXX dollars so by god I am owed a tag or at least a better chance at a tag then sombody who is just starting off. That is freaking rediculous. You did not spend $1500 or what ever it was for 10 years. You spent 150 for each years chance. YOu knew it going into the draw that it was goign to cost that much and it had no bering on futur years. However now you see fit to bring it up because you did not draw. Actually you only spent $6.50 a year to apply. The other $$ was for an Idaho licence. That licens gave you the several other "opportunites" other than applying for the LE hunt. if you did not use that opportunity then it is your fault. The argument about multiple years, is not too far from a system of how many tags you "should" be allowed to apply in for all the states. Is it fair that some guys "get" to apply in 10 states for elk every year, but I don't. Mayby somebody should step in and regulate that as well. "hey man you have 30 points in the various states, we better rtedistribute those to some of these other guys because it is not right that you have so many and the rest have so few... pretty dumb if you ask me, but so are points systems.

How exactly would a system work with only Non Residents having a points system? The way it works now is that RES and NON Res have exactly the same chance at drawing any given tag until the %10 non res quota is met if it is met, then the rest of the tags go to res only.... points for non res only would guarentee that the %10 is met, but that is about all.

Points are nothing more than an additional fee on hunting. They will not improve your odds over the long haul and will most ceartianly reduce a new hunters odds.. They have nothign to do with managment of the animals.

BTW hunting big bulls, I don't mean "you the person" when I said you. I mean your point of view or that particular argument. even if "you" did not say it exactly that way. bottom line don't take it personel.

 

[springbear]

Best post on this subject if you ask me.

Brymoor, well said.



>>Bry, I would like you to
>>answer the first
>>question, I asked it because it
>>has to do
>>with my questioning why you are
>>so against
>>a point system.
>>
>>Sorry I have brought management into
>>this
>>topic, but I would like you
>>to answer all
>>the questions I asked, just so
>>I know
>>a little more where you stand
>>on all
>>issues, or would you like me
>>to open
>>another topic, and get hammered by
>>the
>>non resident haters.
>
>My answers to your questions have
>no relevance to this discussion.
> Every unit has different
>draw odds. I could
>answer that I draw every
>year if I'm applying for
>an undersubscribed unit or I
>that I have never drawn
>if I'm apply for RM
>Sheep unit 11. I
>will say that I am
>smart enough to do a
>little math versus my desire
>to hunt a species before
>I apply.
>
>Why am I against point systems?
> A pure lottery type
>system is the fairest method
>of tag allocation. It's simple.
> The majority of the
>applicants will draw a tag
>if they faithfully apply for
>the same unit within the
>proscribed time frame for the
>odds in the unit. Example,
>I believe Unit 40 Antelope
>is around 1 in 10
>chance (I'm not taking the
>time to look it up).
> You'll eventually draw if
>you apply for ten years
>(assuming the odds don't change
>significantly). A certain percentage
>will draw in year one
>of applying and about the
>same amount in year 10.
>Yes, there may be a
>few outliers in the bell
>curve who will take more
>years but they're a minuscule
>statically anomaly. I know
>going in that it may
>take up to 10 years
>to draw the tag.
>
>How does a point system help
>me draw more tags?
>I already know my statistical
>odds for a unit.
>How does a point system
>increase my odds - by
>limiting opportunity for others!
>People new to the sport
>(new hunters or youth) are
>usually the victims. However,
>I will argue that the
>odds actually get worse.
>With a point system, MORE
>people will apply, knowing that
>if they don't build points
>they will be behind (having
>their opportunity limited). I
>also believe a lot of
>wives end up building points
>at the suggestion of their
>husbands ? further diluting my
>odds.
>
>I believe point systems only benefit
>those who start building points
>in the base year and
>the states who draw more
>money from the systems (WY).
>
>
>By the way, I'm not anti-non
>resident. Hunt in Idaho
>if you want ? we
>may provide the only OTC
>Elk tags available to NRs.
> I also hunt in
>other states by their rules.
> I don't feel that
>I can dictate how they
>run their state just because
>I give them a few
>bucks.

 

[coyotebuster08]

The emotion that this thread is bringing out continues to cloud the facts. So here are a few;
1) The aim of this law is to correct an oversight made by the Idaho lawmakers that tried to vote for a point system a couple of years ago and realized that additional legislative steps needed to be taken before it could became law. They corrected that oversight with this law and if it passes they can them legally adopt a point system weather Idaho hunters like it or not.
2) Idaho residents have never voted on a point system so it is unknown how the majority feels about it. Statements here notwithstanding, they may never get the chance. I don't read any verbage in the proposed law that would require a public vote.
3) Nonresident fee increases are tied to this law and even with the increases IDFG is under funded. From their point of view more money is needed immediately to fund budget shortfalls.
4) Nonresident participation is dropping slightly in other states but was already dropping in Idaho so the shortfall may be larger than expected. See #3
5) Elk and deer numbers on average are declining in Idaho. This will further limit all Idaho hunting.
6) Current elk and deer management plans are dependant on program funding, without adequate funding there will no improvements to big game recruitment and long term herd survival.
7) National hunter retention is declining, federal matching funds for game agencies will decrease as this continues further increasing the budget shortfalls expected.

People say it is all about the money and they are right. All management decisions are determined on a cost/benefit basis.
That is the job of the legislators and wildlife officials.
CB08

 

[Salmonfg]

There seems to be some misunderstanding of the recent history surrounding a point system in Idaho. Several excerpts from Commission meetings, etc. below provide details.

In a nutshell, there was a public survey (Oct 2005) and the majority of respondents were in favor of a bonus point system. The majority was also not in favor of paying more for the contract to implement a new system. The Commission endorsed a bonus point system as long as the cost did not come out of existing budget/programs. So the Commission/Department submitted draft legislation in 2006 to allow the Commission to charge an additional application fee for such a system. When that bill died in the 2006 legislature, the Commission shelved the idea of implementing a point system, essentially leaving further action on the issue to the legislature. The 2009 legislature has now completed the step began in 2006 and the Commission will almost undoubtedly resume discussion about the issue in the near future.

Mar 22, 2005 Commission meeting
"Commissioners endorsed pursuing a bonus point squared system similar to Nevada?s system.
05-28 Commissioner Wright moved and Commissioner Power seconded a motion TO ENDORSE THE TIMELINE PRESENTED BY STAFF AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH A BONUS POINTS SQUARED SYSTEM. The motion carried in a unanimous vote."

Aug 29, 2005 Commission meeting
"Brad Compton, Wildlife Game Manager, presented a final draft of the public scoping survey on the proposed bonus points system (Appendix 38, Exhibit 90)...The survey will be distributed through a random mailing to 600 applicants for controlled hunts for deer, elk, antelope, and moose. It will also be available on the Internet and through the Regions.
05-59 Commissioner Wheeler moved and Commissioner Watts seconded TO ACCEPT THE SURVEY AS PRESENTED AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE SURVEY. The motion carried unanimously."

A few survey results (respondents were 88% residents, 12% nonresidents):
How acceptable would it be for the Department to implement a Bonus Point system for controlled hunts?
Very acceptable = 34%
Somewhat acceptable = 27%
Neutral = 14%
Somewhat unacceptable = 8%
Very unacceptable = 17%

Combination of 2 questions regarding willingness to pay basically showed 30-40% found it acceptable to increase application cost by $5 to pay a contractor to implement and conduct a point system drawing and 50-60% found a $5 charge unacceptable.

Mar 8 2006 Commission meeting
"? HB523 to give the Commission authority to implement a surcharge for a bonus points system passed the House."

The bill later died, so did not become law (see below).

May 18 2006 Commission meeting
"Craig Wiedmeier presented a draft rule on bonus point implementation for Commission review (Appendix 39, Exhibit 60).
...The Commission discussed letting interested legislator(s) take this on. The Commission did the best they could, but it did not proceed when the Senate Resources and Environment Committee
voted against it. Commissioners concurred that the Commission and Department can assist, but to further effort on this issue should be in the hands of interested legislators."

May 26, 2006 news release

"Commission Shelves Bonus Points

Idaho Fish and Game Commissioners will not carry a proposal to establish a bonus point system for controlled hunts to the Legislature again.

Meeting in Coeur d'Alene May 17-19, the Commission was presented a draft of rules for a bonus point system by department staff. The Commission had asked the department for the rules draft prior to a legislative decision that halted a request to raise controlled hunt fees to cover bonus point system costs.

The added cost of the system has been estimated at $2.70 per controlled hunt application. The Commission had agreed the bonus point system would be revenue neutral.

Commissioners commented that they had gone as far as they could to start a bonus point system and that they would not lead any new effort to push the idea through the Legislature.

Some other states use a variety of systems in an attempt to improve odds for unsuccessful controlled hunt applicants in subsequent drawings. Idaho will continue to use a purely random computerized drawing, which gives each applicant an equal chance at available permits regardless of the number of times that person has applied in previous drawings."

I hope this helps clarify the issue somewhat.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[grizzly]

And Tom comes in and ruins all our fun!

Thank you Tom.

Grizzly

 

[coyotebuster08]

Grizzly,
If I read this right Tom was only quoting the 2006 action on the bill, that is what lead to this years attempt at passage.
It is interesting that the residents supported the point system as well, I had been lead to believe otherwise.

Tom,
Thanks for taking the time to clarify this.

I have not heard yet if the govenor signed this yet.
CB08

 

[gemstatejake]

>Grizzly
>
>I had that conversation with Mr.
>Moyle and I would like
>to know if anyone else
>contacted him?
>
>If anyone dos talk to him
>I think it would be
>a good idea to record
>the conversation and if he
>repeats his statement then we
>would have proof and get
>something done about it.
>
>What do you guys thing about
>this?


I've tried to contact Mr. Moyle several times this week. gonna try to e-mail him next. I'm not so sure about recording a conversation.....is that legal? Anyway I defineatly would like to speak with him about this.............

 

[Salmonfg]

If there's an advantage to IDFG employees I must have missed the memo on how to do it.

Seriously, I would just point out that the % of IDFG employees who draw permits is not particularly important unless it is linked to the chances of drawing. In my personal case, I've drawn 64% of permits (9 of 14) I've put in for in first drawings. Sounds pretty impressive, huh? Except 6 of the 9 had draw rates of 100%, 1 was 88%, 1 was 67%, and the last was a hard to draw hunt at 10%. If you add in 2nd chance drawings, I'm at 50% (13 of 26) - 3 of 4 won in 2nd chance draws were 100% chance, other was 88%. Looked at another way, I'm 1 for 14 overall on hunts that had low-medium draw rates. If I had been repeatedly and exclusively putting in for hunts like 44 and 45 late buck, 39 and 46 pronghorn, 31 bull elk, and 18 mountain goat with chances of drawing that ranged from 2.3% to 13% then my expectations for drawing would have been quite different.

I'm not saying any of this to dissuade anyone from investigating potential issues, just that everything should be viewed in an appropriate context.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[zboys]

Just the Facts coyote just the facts

To bad you Facts are Fact up.

 

[Romulus]

What I find amazing after reading these posts is a general lack of understanding how systems work and a desire to resist change even though the modern world is changing and old systems dont work. The Idaho F&W is dropping the ball as far as revenue lost which would not affect resident opportunity at all. Under the current system you have to pick between species to put in for and there is no extra revenue produced from hunters who would be willing to put in for multiple species. The Dept. could put in a system for nonresidents which would not change the current system for residents and produce much needed funds to better manage game with money which is not tied to any additional harvest of the resource. If the nonresident system went to a point system and you were allowed to buy a point every year for the species you were not putting in to draw it could create a lot of addition revenue without any additional animals being harvested. To me it makes common business sense to maximize the dollars a state can take in which are not directly linked to harvest. For example if a nonresident who put in for deer and elk could build pts. for moose or sheep or everything but not be allowed to actually put in to draw the tag that year all of the money made off that pt building would have no impact on the amount of moose or sheep killed. The resident system could stay intact, Non residents could justify putting in for Idaho, The Dept could make more money to improve the resource, Everybody wins. To me it is just common sense. I have yet to see an intelligent argument against.

 

[Salmonfg]

I do not recall any discussion about a nonresident only point system during the original scoping/survey/rule development. To my knowledge, that idea arose in this thread - apparently because the bill included changes to 2 different chapters within Title 36 (Fish and Game laws): ammended versions ended up changing primarily nonresidents fees and adding the point system language. The 2 issues are independent - they were simply addressed under 1 bill by the legislature.

Because residents and nonresidents draw from the same pool (the 10% is a maximum, not a guarantee, also by statute), I would think a point system for nonresidents only would require a change to current methods for the draw or allocation of nonresident opportunity, otherwise nonresidents would have a distinct advantage over residents (basically guaranteeing nonresidents would be awarded 10% of permits).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[Moosey69]

Tom you are right the topic of non-res points only came up in this forum with some people stating that ID could possibly do non-res points only such as what Wyoming does.
But I have to agree with Romulus that all the arguments against, mostly from Residents, have seemed very short-sited. No one knows exactly what system would be put in place and to just say that a point system is unfair and/or would change your ability to hunt the areas you have hunted for 20 or 30 years shows that you are ignorant to the different possibilities the IDFG would have. Everyone against seems to assume that if a point system is in place all the OTC tags are gone and they will have to cut the total # of tags for some reason. Why? They could keep everything the same and just start giving points for increasing your controlled hunt odds in future years.
And for the people who keep talking about fairness, how in the hell is a random draw where someone could possibly draw a controlled hunt tag 3 or 4 years in a row because of their luck more fair than giving a guy some advantage in the future that has never drawn a tag after several years of applying. I have not seen a fairness arguement here that has come close to convincing me a point system is unfair.

 

[two8E]

A clarification here, Salmon FG, a majority is 51%, 34% is not a majority. I also wonder how the questions for that survey were worded? The Idaho hunters I have talked to are overwhelmingly against a bonus or preference point system, at a rate of 20 to 1.

 

[zboys]

RANDOM DRAW IS THE FAIREST DRAW SYSTEM OUT THERE. IF SOMEONE DRAWS A BUCK OR BULL TAG ONE YEAR THEN THEY CAN NOT PUT IN FOR A ANTLER HUNT THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

IN THE RANDOM DRAW EVERYONE HAS THE SAME CHANCE AT DRAWING TAGS EVERY YEAR AND IF YOU DO DRAW YOU DONT HAVE TO WAIT 5,10,15 YEARS TO HAVE A LEGITIMATE CHANCE AT DRAWING ANOTHER TAG.

THERE IS YOUR LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT ON THIS SUBJECT. EVERYONE KNOWS THE NUMBER OF HUNTERS ARE GOING DOWN BECAUSE THE KIDS DONT WANT TO WAIT FOR YEARS TO GO ON A HIGH PRESSURED 7 DAY HUNT.

AND FOR YOU GUYS THAT DONT DRAW THATS JUST TOUGH LUCK. UNTIL YOU CAN PROVE THAT THE F&G ARE CHEATING YOU OUT OF YOUR TAG THEN IT JUST WASNT YOUR YEAR BUT BE SURE YOU KNOW YOU HAD THE EXACT SAME CHANCE AT DRAW THAT TAG THEN ANYONE ELSE BECAUSE IT WAS RANDOM RANDOM RANDOM RANDOM.

FOR YOU NON RESIDENT THAT GET ON HERE AND USE WORDS LIKE IDAHOANS ARE SHORT-SITED, IGNORANT, ECT. DONT EXPECT US TO LISTEN TO YOUR WHINNING ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE SPENT AND NO TAG TO SHOW FOR IT. WHY ARE YOU SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON THE IDAHO FORUM BECAUSE YOU CAN ONLY HUNT YOUR STATE EVERY 10 YEARS AND YOU CALL THAT PROGRESS. KEEP PROGRESS AND FIX YOUR OWN STATE.

 

[two8E]

It is fair because everyone gets their name in for the controlled hunt they put in to for a tag.

I am glad Idaho is not following the failed lead of other states in the preference, bonus, point boondoggle.

 

[andrew_12gauge]

point systems are the worst idea ever. you say it is only fair that after so many years you should be guaranteed a tag but didnt you parents ever teach you life isnt fair. as it stands right now i would say that most residents would have a shot of drawing all 3 OIL tags in their lifetimes along with numerous other tags if they are not applying for the toughest draws every year most non residents would have a shot at drawing at least one OIL tag in a lifetime which is pretty good odds for a non resident, if a point system is implemented most non residents can only dream of ever drawing any of the OIL tags ever and most of the residents will be lucky to draw one in a lifetime compared to the way it is now. deer and elk limited draws will be a once every 15-20 year affair then as well and i personally would think it is more fair to have a chance at drawing numerous (8-10)tags in my lifetime over a chance to maybe draw 2-3 limited tags in the remainder of my lifetime

 

[IDdesertman]

Question for the folks that think points system is the only way to be "fair". If a point system is implemented, folks spend 5 years building points, and then a 12 year old kid decides he wants to start deer hunting. Is it "fair" to that kid that he doesn't have a chance in hell of drawing a tag? I was lucky enough to draw Unit 40 when I was a 12, does that really piss guys off that I hadn't $$$$paid$$$$ my dues yet? Points are great for guys that can afford to put in for every state in the west and Canada, because it doesn't matter if it takes 10 years to draw a tag here, because at least you'll draw a hunt or two somewhere. I don't think this is the case for the average guy that just hunts their own state.

 

[Moosey69]

Wow, the last few posts could not have proved my point any better about most of the people fighting against it being short-sited. With comments about it would take you 15-20 years to get a tag, and that youths would have to wait years to get a high pressure 7 day hunt, you don't know that and neither do I or anyone. No one really knows what the guidelines would even be, and surprise your youths may still have to wait years for a "high presure 7 day hunt" if their not lucky! And if they just wanted to get out there and hunt every year, there could still be unlimited OTC tags in the same areas there are now with a point system.
But you guys just keep worring with your preconceived ideas about what a point system would do, and then don't give any input when the IDFG is figuering out what type of system it will adopt.

 

[andrew_12gauge]

I think the point here is we simply dont want a new system the one we have now works just fine

 

[zboys]

Name a points system that you will not have to wait every ten years or more to draw a sought after tag. Name one right now go ahead name one I am waiting name one. We are so short sighted that there are all these points systems that is going to make everything fair. Are short sightedness is keeping are hunting heritage safe from hunters that believe that they are owed something from the state of Idaho because they gave the F&G there money and came and hunted in an open area because there state dos not let them hunt every year. The only thing you are owed is a CHANCE IN THE RANDOM DRAW TO DRAW A TAG LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OR ANY WHERE ON THE PLANET FOR THAT MATTER.

YOU ARE NOT OWED ANYTHING BUT THE SAME CHANCE AS EVERYONE ELSE.
YOU ARE NOT MORE IMPORTANT THEN ANYONE ELSE.

I seriously can not believe people anymore how spoiled they are and how greedy that they thing they should be able to hunt in front of a youth hunter because they have more points is that fair. Of course thats going to happen with a points system and the big man will say YOU HAVE TO PUT IN THE TIME AND MONEY TO BE AS GOOD AS ME.

Its not all about tags.

 

[gemstatejake]

If Idaho does go this route, they need to come up with their own system. Using nevada asd a model would be bad IMO. Top tier hunts are still ultra tough to draw, (As I've pointed out repeatedly, basically it's all the same, you'll most likeky never draw the tag you want) particularly for non-residents there. Idaho may have the luxury of being more liberal with tags than Nevada due to the fact we have bigger herds than them, so that might help some.

One reason I'm highly suspicious of this is that I do see it as a step toward limiting general hunts. You know half the people who favor this will be screaming for more/statewide controlled hunts next.................

 

[idahoan]

Mossey Some people might be short sided one way but you are short sided the other way. Things need to be done in Idaho thats for damn sure. I beg to differ that a points system will help with the wolf packs, that a points system will help with managing mountain lions cause there sure are a lot of those. How about pressure during the winter fro shed hunters who don't give a darn or coyotes in which there are a million, If Idahoans and Everyone else including the fish and game pushed more to regulaste these there herds would be a lot better thus bringing in more revenue. Probably not as much as a points system but it would help. Everybody is just looking at this as their best point of view who can blame them.

PS: I don't like the idea of people buying points for multiple species that was mentioned in the above thread for species they won't hunt that year.Stupid, that would deffinitly water down the system.

 

[coyotebuster08]

Nevada and Arizona both have OK systems but they are based on much smaller game populations than Idaho now has.
For instance, Idaho offers more OTC nonresident deer tags than Nevada has in their total draw. Arizona offers slightly more than that with a much lower harvest rate.
Both offer youth-only draws so that kids are not competing with adults for some of the same tags.
Arizona offers some decent tags for rifle or archery elk that NR can draw every few years, it is simply a matter of reading the regs and understanding them. Arizona still offers some archery NR OTC tags for deer during the rut as well in some units. OTC elk tags are available as well.

With over 60% of the survey respondants having a positive view of a points system it is likely to happen in Idaho, this is Idaho's chance to craft the program they want by choosing what they like about other states systems and modifying them accordingly. It should be interesting to see what happens. General hunts are a good money maker for the state and there would be no need to put them into the draw system unless herds decline further and it is necessary at that point to prevent overhunting.

CB08

 

[deepforks]

here is fish and games response to me on 4/20......

Kiefer,Sharon ([email protected])

Senate Bill 1141aa,aa has passed both the House and the Senate, and sits on the Governor's desk for signature. This bill includes permissive language to allow the Fish and Game Commission to conduct rulemaking to create a bonus point system. "Permissive" means the choice to conduct rulemaking is up to the Commission, the law does not direct the Commission to undertake this program. If the Commission decides to look into a bonus point system, it will be done with public input so sportsmen will have the opportunity to tell the Commission whether they support moving ahead with this concept or not. Please feel free to communicate with the Commissioner from your region, their contact information can be found on the Fish and Game website, http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/

 

[two8E]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-21-09 AT 09:42AM (MST)[p]I stipulate that if you add in the "Somewhat acceptable" category to the mix it does come up to over 60%.

Somewhat acceptable, what kind of category is that? ON a scale of 1 to a 1,000,000, if you thought it was a .00000000001, that would be somewhat acceptable. Duh, Like WOW!

 

[Romulus]

Top tier hunts are nearly impossible to draw no matter what system you use. Idaho is no different. Lucky guys can come on here and say they drew some great tag but the fact is most guys that draw consistently draw tags that are not in high demand and that would not change with a pt system. The chance to put in a system from the ground floor using the best elements from each state to maximize interest in all sections of the hunting population is our best chance to pass on hunting to the next generation. You can combine over the counter, limited, different weapon groups, resident and nonresident, meat hunters and trophy hunters to create a system that has elements that appeal to all. The bottom line in the current economy is if hunters get disgusted and quit we lose some of our voice which just happens to coincide with money generated by hunting. The game depts will face budget shortages and there will be no help from anywhere else. Little by little we will lose ground if we dont change with the times and we or our children will wake up one day and hunting will be no more just like trapping in some areas, hound hunting, etc. If we dont listen to each other and be open to positive change it will happen. It may happen no matter what we do we are quickly becoming the minority.

 

[Califelkslayer]

I read every single post, took over 1/2 an hour. Some really strong feelings, WOW.

Idaho has very liberal seasons where you can hunt big game for 3-4 months. If I was a resident, I think I'd resist change too. I could put in for a controlled hunt and if unsuccessful, I could hunt my back-up area that I've learned very well. I could start with archery elk in August and hunt through Nov. What's in a point system if I'm the guy that scouts general areas pre-season and know several areas very well??? Not much.

And do i need a 350 bull or a 190 buck?? No, I want a quality animal for the quality of area I'm huntin.

Based on this I understand most of the resident's stance on this issue.

Back on Post #16 I recommended the Wyoming system BUT that would lessen opportunity for residents. They give 10% GUARENTEED to non-residents, not "up to 10%."

In the mid-90s, I checked on the draw results of unit 40. 199 tags. 13 to NRs. 10% would have been 19 tags. This is a small example but would you as a non-resident be willing to give up say 3% more tags for millions in more revenue? Probably not but I'm not sure. Given the previous responses, I don't believe most on here would be willing to give up even one tag to a non-resident regardless of the additional revenue.

That's the question the residents should be asking themselves!!

I've applied for Unit 40 17 times without a tag and NO, you don't owe me a damnn thing cause I knew the rules goin in. I've hunted Idaho elk 4 times, mostly OTC archery after the draws in other states didn't work out. Taken 2 bulls. So I'm not down on Idaho, just realistic.

My future Idaho plans under the current system?? Draw a moose tag for my wife and get out. If I draw moose in the meantime, great, if not, oh well. If a PP system for Non-residents was implemented, you'd get both our money every year for as long as I can hunt. I actually enjoy giving Nevada approx $300.00 a piece each year knowing we are dangerous for 6 species each.

Like I said in Post #16, just let me know the rules and I'll let you know if I'm playing.

 

[Salmonfg]

I'm sorry, I should have put quotes around the question. The wording was verbatim from the survey: "How acceptable would it be for the Department to implement a Bonus Point system for controlled hunts?"

Combining positive or acceptable levels versus negative or unacceptable levels is a standard practice for summarizing publc opinion surveys. Thus 34% and 27% (61% total) said a bonus point system was acceptable at some level, whereas 25% found it unacceptable at some level.

Survey results were summarized for 2 groups: a statistically valid, random selection (which I provided) and non-random responses to an on-line survey (with unknown bias, etc.). The random survey was completed by 1,043 hunters (65% response rate). There were 3,179 valid responses to the on-line survey. The response to "How acceptable would it be for the Department to implement a Bonus Point system for controlled hunts?" from the on-line survey was quite similar to the randomly selected group:
Very acceptable = 41%
Somewhat acceptable = 23%
Neutral = 7%
Somewhat unacceptable = 8%
Very unacceptable = 21%

So 64% acceptable at some level and 29% unacceptable.


I will reiterate one piece of past Commission action regarding the type of point system.
Mar 22, 2005 Commission meeting
"Commissioners endorsed pursuing a bonus point squared system similar to Nevada?s system.
05-28 Commissioner Wright moved and Commissioner Power seconded a motion TO ENDORSE THE TIMELINE PRESENTED BY STAFF AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH A BONUS POINTS SQUARED SYSTEM. The motion carried in a unanimous vote."

Obviously, that action is nearly 4 years old and the Commission will re-address the issue as they see fit (or perhaps not at all), but it indicated where they ended up in previous deliberation on the issue.

I am not promoting any particular viewpoint whatsoever, just trying to provide some background info.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[3bigelkid]

Well, you can all stop arguing now. The Governer veto'd this bill for a Non-res fee increase that included the add for the bonus point disscusion. This was one of 10 bills he veto'd yesterday! We will see if it is brought up again, probably next session. Better start bending your House and Senate rep's ear now if you want to be heard.

 

[Salmonfg]

Actually, it was not one of the vetoed bills. The vetoed bill that impacted IDFG was the appropriations bill (S1177). S1141aa is still on the governor's desk.

 

[3bigelkid]

Tom,
My bad. I was under the impression the bonus point addmendment was attached directly to the F&G appropriation bill and thus would fall under the veto. It was also reported with that inferance in the local news paper, but they could be wrong also.

 

[Salmonfg]

Agreed - I had to do some digging to see just what happened.

 

[zboys]

Just heard on the news the Governor vetoed 25 more bill so I am sure the bill we have been talking about is vetoed.

So much for progress. I guess everyone will have to buck up when they dont draw this year.

 

[REDDOG]

>Name a points system that you
>will not have to wait
>every ten years or more
>to draw a sought after
>tag. Name one right now
>go ahead name one I
>am waiting name one. We
>are so short sighted that
> there are all these
>points systems that is going
>to make everything fair. Are
>short sightedness is keeping are
>hunting heritage safe from hunters
>that believe that they are
>owed something from the state
>of Idaho because they gave
>the F&G there money and
>came and hunted in an
>open area because there state
>dos not let them hunt
>every year. The only thing
>you are owed is a
>CHANCE IN THE RANDOM DRAW
>TO DRAW A TAG LIKE
>EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UNITED
>STATES OF AMERICA OR ANY
>WHERE ON THE PLANET FOR
>THAT MATTER.
>
>YOU ARE NOT OWED ANYTHING BUT
>THE SAME CHANCE AS EVERYONE
>ELSE.
>YOU ARE NOT MORE IMPORTANT THEN
>ANYONE ELSE.
>
>I seriously can not believe people
>anymore how spoiled they are
>and how greedy that they
>thing they should be able
>to hunt in front of
>a youth hunter because they
>have more points is that
>fair. Of course thats going
>to happen with a points
>system and the big man
>will say YOU HAVE TO
>PUT IN THE TIME AND
>MONEY TO BE AS GOOD
>AS ME.
>
>Its not all about ta


Native of Idaho here, but have moved away for work. i have hunted idaho longer than any other state, i'm fairlyyoung, but have never drawn a tag in ID, some years i apply for tough tags, some years easy to draw tags, but the results have been the same, so to answer your question:

Utah, have drawn 2LE elk tags, and am sitting on enuff points to draw the unit i want next year(unless i get lucky this year)I have also drawn a pronghorn tag,cougar,two turkey tags. also draw a general deer every year and hunt OTC elk every year.

Wyoming, have drawn for deer and lope every year scince the point system, also 2 elk tags.

Colorado, OH THE DREADED TRUE BONUS SYSTEM!! hav edrawn a deer and elk tag every year scince '04 (the year i started applying)my best bucks have came from this state and i never use points, i draw second chance units and keep building points for a great
unit.

Nevada and Arizona i have never drawn, but have only app;ied for 2 years.

I wonder if you guys against a point system even know how they work? you think cause you have a point system you cant hunt every year, that may be in the best area's, bu most area's will remain open to you, and in the mean time, you can build points for that great unit, and STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO DRAW IT ANY GIVEN YEAR.

what ever the state decides, i will continue to hunt Idaho every year, there are some special places in the state to me. but i would like to see a point system.

 

[Salmonfg]

Word I received is the Governor signed S1141 (as amended) today (22 Apr).

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager

 

[Moosey69]

Point Systems

First of all Reddog if you read some of the posts you will see that alot of guys against obviously dont know how they can work, and/or are trying to convince other people on here that point systems will dramatically cut their tags and limit their ability to hunt every year.
And as far as his first question, Wyoming and Colorado both come to mind as they both have lots of great areas that you can hunt every year even with the point system. Wyoming has region tags for Deer and General Elk tags that you can draw every year and still gain points if you draw as a second choice. And Colorado has some great Deer areas that you can draw %100 with no points and unlimited OTC Elk tags in lots of areas.

 

[madmoose]

in regards to trophy species. where here in idaho, you can only apply for one, and NO other antlered hunt. wouldn't a hunter want some kind of reward for there years of applying persistance.

not saying that every hunter NEEDS to put in for another antlered hunt in there hunting career, but thats not even an option, if you want to continually put in for a trophy species.

thats a rule i personally wouldn't change, but giving points for persistance for the particular species applied i could see.

have friends that have put in for moose, 17 plus years, 20 years, and 22 years. and these are hunts that have what i consider good draw odds. these same guys as well with most hunting america i'm sure would enjoy hunting a controlled hunt for a different animal in a different area of idaho, just as anybody else would. nope...... still waiting for moose.

now given the length of time already expended, those same hunters could have experienced a moose hunt along a slew of others.

for those opposed to a point system. how about you put in for ONE animal for the next 15 to 20 years or more, not a premo hunt either, just your run of the mill controlled hunt, while others in the same time frame are drawing underneath you routinely for there first time, second time and so on.

sound fair????

theres still nothing saying your going to draw a tag in 15 or 20 years either.

those folks that have put in for sheep, goats, moose for sooooo long, could have drawn already and be out of the loop and moved on being those animals are once in a lifetime. but still those folks continue to put in along with the new folks wanting to draw year after year.

the same system we have now, but you just get a point for each year you dont draw. just like other states , it doesnt mean that if you had eleven points your deff. going to get a tag, somebody with 3 might draw. but at least you could personally be bettering your odds each year for your persistance.

what is wrong with that?

 

[Califelkslayer]

Mad, Even though you apply moose, can you hunt a OTC elk or deer unit if unsucessful?? That would suck if all your eggs were in the moose basket for 20+ years. I would have given up personally.

 

[andrew_12gauge]

yes you can still hunt any otc or unlimited controlled hunts if you apply for any OIL hunts

 

[springbear]

It has not been that way for 20 years either. You used to be able to apply for every thing. F&G changed it to reduce compitition for the LE tags. Kind of like choose your lottery.

 

[Lowlandmulies]

What happened to Mr. Positive ZBoys? After he hearing the news about the bill passing we haven't heard from him! Kind of quite on this thread now! Just because it passed doesn't mean everything is going to change. Most of you guys that hunt over the counter tags probable won't notice a thing

Hey Tom, thanks for all your investigative work on this matter and many others here on monster muleys. I always enjoy getting the facts from someone with your background. Thank you!

All right Gemstate, pic it a part! Hey, I was thinking if you're not busy painting right now, could you help me proof the articles on my web-site? www.muledeercountry.com It would give you something to do in your spare time! It doesn't pay to well

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[zboys]

Just waiting for concrete confirmation. I thought the Governor was vetoing all the bills in front of him. Someone has hard evidence?

Lets talk about the guys in Arizona, Utah, ect. that have Max points that might not ever get there tags after putting in for 15 years. I like my odds in a random draw then waiting 15 years and never having a chance because there is 100 guys in front of you and there are only 5 tags. This scenario will eventually be played out in Idaho.

Dont fix something if its not broke.

 

[excaliber]

>Just waiting for concrete confirmation. I
>thought the Governor was vetoing
>all the bills in front
>of him. Someone has hard
>evidence?
>
>Lets talk about the guys in
>Arizona, Utah, ect. that have
>Max points that might not
>ever get there tags after
>putting in for 15 years.
>I like my odds in
>a random draw then waiting
>15 years and never having
>a chance because there is
>100 guys in front of
>you and there are only
>5 tags. This scenario will
>eventually be played out in
>Idaho.
>
>Dont fix something if its not
>broke.

Utah and AZ have preference point systems Idaho's system supposedly will be similar to Nevada's BONUS POINT SYSTEM if it were to adopt one.
There's a huge difference between the two. More people thought it needs fixing if you look at how they voted.

 

[zboys]

Explain Nevada's bonus point system. The way I understand it you are not ever guaranteed a tag even if you have put in for 10 or 15 years.

 

[andrew_12gauge]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-24-09 AT 07:47PM (MST)[p]Nevadas bonus point system is just like washingtons bonus point system you buy an app you get a point, the number of points you have squared is the number of times your name/number goes into the "barrel" so in the first year everyone would have 1 point therefore giving them 1 chance, by year 10 you have 100's of people with 10 points each so now they all have 100 chances and that guy who comes into the draw for the first time has 1 chance and can never catch up so if they do do a bonus point system i suggest anyone and everyone who ever wants to draw a tag in idaho better choose what they apply for wisely because if we get a bonus point system and we still have to pick and choose what we are applying for we are all fu(ked

 

[madmoose]

the way i see a point system is this.

you apply,
your name doesn't get drawn, you get a point for the next year.
(the next year)
you apply, your name is in the hat twice, you dont get drawn, get a point for next year.
(next year)
you apply, name goes in 3 times... and so on.

no reason to make it any more complicated. keep it simple.

other folks that apply for the same tag for the first time could draw too. just as your points build up your name is in the hat that many more times.
a reward for your persistance, but still anybodys tag.

really whats wrong with that. why would you NOT want to have a little bit better chance of drawing a tag year after year applying for the same damn hunt.

the majority of controlled hunts out there are not some premo trophy packed units. they are just purely to sensitive to have a general season of any kind, so harvest has to be strictly controlled. thats it.

 

[BucksBullsandBroncs]

+1 I am all for my odds of drawing going up every year I don't draw and people not being able to just 'buy points' to up their odds.

The general hunts will still be there if you don't draw. I see no problem with the points system at this time.

 

[Lowlandmulies]

Hey guys, face it there is no perfect system. It all boils down to our personal interest. What the guys really don't understand is the fairness issue. It's not fair that a guy draws the best hunt in the state 3 out 7 years when others haven't drawn the tag in over twenty years. Sure life isn't always fair but we have the opportunity to do something in the right direction and you people are afraid of change. I can draw Colorado tag every year and shot a 170 class buck that seems pretty fair for a non res. I can draw Nevada tag every two or tree years and chase 30 inch bucks, that seems pretty fair to the non res. I don't see anything wrong with the system!

Lets try and put our personal issues aside and do whats right for everybody including the deer. Yes, some general hunts need to be controlled. Sorry guys its a fact. You don't need to kill a buck every year! If you think you do then find another way to put something back into the herds. The herds nation wide look bad and Idaho is the leader in bad management.

When I say management, I mean everything for habitat to over harvest. Killing does is not making our population any stronger (number wise). A few years of limiting harvest and the deer numbers could bounce back dramatically. If we get some wet springs.

I love to hunt as much as the next guy if not a little more. Idaho needs to get off it butt and do what right for the deer herds and be a leader in conservation. Idaho is fast losing it's non resident support and we cant afford to do that. Know matter what you guys think! It doesn't matter how many non res tags you buy. What about the license fees from non res. Maybe if you were to buy a non res tag as a resident you should have to buy the non res license with it, so Idaho doesn't lose that money also. That might help off set some of the loss from non residents who are not putting in for Idaho tags! Non resident money is huge to the state of Idaho, sorry guys smell the coffee

Just some food for thought

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[Frontier]

>the way i see a point
>system is this.
>
>you apply,
>your name doesn't get drawn, you
>get a point for the
>next year.
>(the next year)
>you apply, your name is in
>the hat twice, you dont
>get drawn, get a point
>for next year.
>(next year)
>you apply, name goes in 3
>times... and so on.
>
>no reason to make it any
>more complicated. keep it simple.
>
>
>other folks that apply for the
>same tag for the first
>time could draw too. just
>as your points build up
>your name is in the
>hat that many more times.
>
> a reward for your persistance,
>but still anybodys tag.
>
>really whats wrong with that. why
>would you NOT want to
>have a little bit better
>chance of drawing a tag
>year after year applying for
>the same damn hunt.
>


+2 The people that are against such a system obviously flunked basic arithmetic. The thing I worry about is the IDFG messing with it, and making it unfair.

 

[coyotebuster08]

Again, and a point that was already stated;
Idaho is favoring a squared point system that would give applicants the following "chances" in the draw.
0 point = 1 chance
1 point = 2 chances
2 points = 5 chances
3 points = 10 chances
4 points = 17 chances
5 points = 26 chances
6 points = 37 chances
7 points = 50 chances
8 points = 65 chances
9 points = 82 chances
10 points = 101 chances
and that guy that has been applying 20 years,
= 401 chances in the draw.
(20 points x 20 = 400 chances + the current year application = 401 chances)

So, someone that is looking at a hunt with 10-1 odds would know that he would need 3 bonus points to likely draw that tag. I say likely because no gaurantee is given but the system favors him getting that tag.

A quick look at 2007 Nevada bonus points with the top point holders reveals the following;
Antelope (all hunts)
1 hunter has 12 points (Max Points possible is 15)
2 hunters have 10 points
5 hunters have 9 points
8 hunters have 8 points
3 hunters have 5 points for archery (Max Points possible is 15)
2 hunters have 4 points for archery
Deer
2 hunters have 8 points (Max points possible is 15)
9 hunters have 7 points
16 hunters have 6 points

Most of the bitterness against these systems stems from (IMO) people that do not understand how the system works and don't bother to learn them. Or, they become fixated on a specific hunt that everyone else is applying for and get frustrated when they don't draw, but in looking at the results these systems work.
Flexible hunters with flexible weapon choices and schedules are well served by these systems. Rigid "My Way or No Way" hunters will always be upset with any system that does not favor them each year with "Their" tag.
CB08

 

[andrew_12gauge]

thats great that nevada somehow allocates tags with that system you would never see stats on points for washington which is the exact same draw system because they dont want you to know how many people have "max points" also you say that for a hunt with 1-10 odds you would need 3 points to draw this makes no sense because when you have 3 points there are 7 others who have 3 points as well so you wont have better than 1-7 odds, and even 7 years down the road once you are ahead of everyone else in points guess what you still wont be able to draw. bonus point systems dont guarantee anything

 

[Lowlandmulies]

They guarantee that you have better odds then the guys that have already drawn the tag!

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[REDDOG]

lots of guys love Nevada's system, I dont, it is my least favorite out of them all because it never gurentee's a tag, other systems, like utah, give 50% random and 50% to max, so at some point if you are unlucky and wind up in the max point pool, they have to give you a tag.

now understand, just because there are guys with say 15 points, that doesnt mean thats max for every unit, some units may be at 10 points for max, just depends on the applicant's.

 

[Califelkslayer]

And Wyoming gives 75% to Max point holders BUT no preference to anyone in the random draw, unlike Utah.

Any system that rewards you for applying will increase revenue for Idaho.

Point systems are addictive!! You feel you aren't ever gonna draw if you don't apply every year. Who benefits?? The state with increased revenue.

 

[gemstatejake]

Funny stuff here........knock yourself out with the points (I'd also point out IDFG has not implemented anything and the likelyhood of them doing so is unknown). As has been stated, you get no guarantee. A good tag as a non-res is next to impossible with Nevada's system. A marginal tag can be drawn though. About as good (maybe slightly better or worse) as an OTC tag in Idaho right now.


See I told you! No sooner has this points thing come down the pike and the "money hunters", "cinematographers", and holier than thou "conservationists" started gripeing to "control" general seasons! As if we can't control ourselves........We defineately need more rules, regulations, hoops, and bull$hit imposed upon us! Rejoice at the next step toward the Colovadazonafication of Idaho!


Lowland.....the site looks great. Obviously someone a fair bit brighter than me is running it for you. I'm pretty busy but thanks for the offer though..........}>

 

[gemstatejake]

Heres a few definitions of the word "fair" :

Free from favoritism, self interest, or bias.
Free from favoring one party over another, a level plaing field.
Without irregularity or uneveness.
The treating of all parties alike, justly and equitably.
Lack of desire to obtain a selfish advantage.

Which system does this most closely describe? LMAO!
Who the hell was it that said we cant understand the "fairness issue"??????? There it is in black and white. By definition, you cant be any more fair than everyone has the same chance. No amount of mouth yammering will ever change that, sorry to tell you.

If your putting in for years upon years without success, it must be a hunt with poor odds of draw. Otherwise you would have drawn it. Points wont really help with those high profile tags as a non-resident.

Just to show the flipside of the "poor me" crowd, Since "97 I've drawn four controlled tags in Idaho. One highly sought after tag and three others that were pretty good as well. Would I have done any better with the totally fabulous and almighty points system?.............NO. But by all means, lets screw around and tinker with stuff that really doesn't need it. We'll feel so much better and no one will ever claim we're afraid of "change". HA!

 

[Lowlandmulies]

There's Jakie, can always count on you to look in your dictionary. Bring on the points and I can guarantee you won't draw that many tags. HA!

Gem, I don't mind the system the way it is now. I've been very fortunate to draw unit 45 three times in the last nine years. It won't happen with a points system. That just the way it is.

Glad to here you are busy You can afford some chances at the super tags! Call me I lost your number.

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[Lowlandmulies]

Gemstate

So where are we going to get the money we are losing from non res not putting in for Idaho. Where are we going to get the money to bring back the deer herds? I know you say the deer herds are fine because you see them every year. Sounds like you work for the Fish and Game instead of yourself. So where are we going to get the money? Got any ideas

By the way Nevada's 6's and 7's are better then all of the general hunts in Idaho! You telling me you see 30 bucks a day in your general hunt?

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[gemstatejake]

Are we certain non-res revenue is tanking? I'm asking because I don't know......I've read it on this thread but thats about the only place I've heard of non residents giving up on Idaho. If so thats a shame, both for IDFG and a bunch of non-resident sportsmen who miss out on great opportunity Idaho still has.


If all it's gonna take to bring back Idaho's herds is money, count me as someone who's willing to pay more. As I stated earlier, money vs time spent hunting is no contest. I'll pay and so will most everyone else. So my answer is raise fees for residents and non-residents alike. Will that help?

I don't believe Idaho's deer herds are "fine". I think some areas are hurting badly and special attention is needed in those areas. I'm for that. In general things are in a downcycle for mule deer here. And MANY other areas throughout the west. This has happened before. It will happen again. I'm betting we got a rebound coming. Hoping the mule deer initiative started in '04 will begin to pay off and mother nature will give us a couple mild winters.

Yeah, the 06 areas are way better than general mule deer hunting in Idaho. They better be, I've spent the last eleven years trying to pull that tag! I'd call that a pretty highly sought after tag. 051 would be a better comparison to some of our general seasons. It can be pretty dang good too given the right conditions (snow pack, wet spring, etc).

A couple years back, I saw eleven bucks in one day in a general unit here in Idaho. One was a trophy by my standards. Thats the last good buck I've seen while hunting here....... And yeah, I'll be making the annual "donation" to the super hunt thing......god, what would it be like to draw one of those???? Oh wait, I guess one of these days you can tell me!

 

[Lowlandmulies]

It only took us five years to draw the 6's We can draw it every three years if we hunt it archery. Thats great for a highly sought after hunt!

You might want to look at switching to the muzzy or bow if you don't like waiting so long.

Have a great evening!

Steve
www.muledeercountry.com

 

[Deerlove]

Steve not having bonus pts is keeping a lot of $ out of Id. I'm ok with not having them but make the waiting period 3 years.. People living out west can get an OTC tag in Id, but thats not a viable option for people living 5 states away.

 

[UGAhunter]

I say leave Idaho as it is. If you want to play bonus point games, there are plenty of states that offer them.

As I see it, Bonus points are bad because:

1) It is unfair to younger hunters. They will always be behind in the game. Especially those systems with set aside for max point holders like Utah.

2) Bonus point systems encourage additional applicants. That will lower the odds of drawing a tag.

3) They further the notion that certain people (those with lots of points) are entitled to a tag. The fact of the matter is: when there are 30 applicants for every tag, not everyone CAN have a chance to hunt that unit. Many people will die of old age before their chance comes around.

4) IF you get in on the first year, you will probably be guaranteed at least ONE tag in your lifetime.

Some Pros are:

1) More money to the Fish and Game.

2) You are guaranteed something for your money - a bonus point - that you can call your own and brag about when you get 15 to 20 of them.

 

[Romulus]

Bonus points for some people help justify their investment of a non res license, application fee, etc when they will not hunt that state if they dont draw a tag. Some people whether they can afford to or not will not spend $200 to $300 on the 1 in 10 chance that they can draw a tag. However with a pt system those same people will give you money every year even though they may only hunt your state 1 time in 10 years. It is a no brainer. And those of you who dont get it would understand if your bank account was linked to the revenue stream generated the past 5 years versus the potential revenue stream the first 5 years that included a point system. I put in for every western state every year with the exception of California(limited opportunity) and Idaho( no pts system). I have put in for Idaho off and on through the years for units with 1 in 4 to 1 in 15 odds and never drawn a tag. With a pt system if I still had no tag I would still apply every year because I would know my history counted for something. As it is now my $1500 I have given and never hunted gives me the same odds as the guy who drew tags 2 years in a row. I feel that systems that try to let people take turns with the tags is "fair". But to each their own. Hopefully Idaho will reach its full potential as a great hunting state because it has the genetics and habitat to do that.