Idaho Bonus/Preference point system

U

UGAhunter

Moderator
Messages
958
A Bill has been introduced to mandate establishment of a bonus/preference point system in Idaho. It is H 0145. If you oppose such a move, contact your Representatives asap! If you support it, please ignore this message. ;-)
 
I have contacted my reps and urged them to oppose the passage of this bill.

I cannot understand the selfish motivations of those who keep bringing this debate forward when in the last ten years it has been rejected 3 times by Idaho sportsman.
 
Just say "NO".

If you think it will be a "fair" system because you feel like you can't draw now, you are wrong and need to research the math.

Once we have a BP System, more and more individuals will jump in because they won't want to be left out so the odd's will not be the same as they are now, they will be much lower.

Youth that can't start from the beginning and anyone who for any reason doesn't have max points will be screwed forever. High demand hunts, that are the only real game changers(Deer 22, 40, 44, 45....etc)will only even be a dream to those with max points and will NEVER be guaranteed to anyone over age 20 or so.

This is something for NR's who want to play the points game in 10 states every year. This will allow them to be guaranteed to draw Unit 39 early or Unit 73 once every 4 years. Woopee! I say give them that.

Our system is just fine. Yes you may NEVER hunt unit 45 for deer or 54 for elk, but right now you have just as much a chance as you ever will....every "other" year.

Why is this any business of a legislator? Fish and Game keeps asking the residents and the majority keeps saying NO. What special interest is pushing this? Moyle seems to always be behind these.
 
I've said it a 100 times no pts but LONGER waiting periods. Id is greedy and want that $150 hunting license every year from NR's.
 
Every state is "greedy". We are the only one you can come buy OTC tags in units that still produce bucks like the one on this month's Eastman's.

I say give them their BP system and charge them plenty for it so they can feel good about their donation.
 
Thanks for the link. I contacted my legislators, and contacted some like-minded individuals to encourage them to do the same.
 
Not looking for a fight, but I kind of like the idea. I've only lived here for about 2 years, and don't have a lot of hope that I'll ever draw some of the controlled hunts I would like to draw. With a BP system in place If I'm patient enough, I can eventually draw. While I wait, I still have the opportunity to hunt non-controlled hunts.

I came from AZ where they have a BP system in place. In AZ, all rifle deer hunts are done on a draw basis. I would apply for the tag I really wanted and hope for the best. If I didn't get drawn, I got a BP. There were always left over tags after the draw and I could pick one up and still go hunting. Of course the left over tags aren't the very best tags, but I was able to kill a decent deer every year I ended up with a left over tag, and when I built up 5 or 6 points, I was able to get another quality tag.

I know there's no perfect system, there's pros and cons to each approach. I can't complain at all because I just got here and still don't understand how everything works. Maybe AZ sold me on the hope that if I wait long enough I could eventually get some of the prize tags.

On another note, I've been surprised at the lack of deer and elk I've seen here in Idaho while out hunting/scouting. There have been days where I've been in some of the best looking country I've ever seen and not seen a single deer or elk. I know I'm still new and haven't been able to spend the amount of time I'd like to, but it just seems to me the country I have hunted and scouted should hold quite a few more animals. I'm guessing wolves and hard winters are at least partly to blame.
 
Take it from me, you DO NOT want to go to a points system. Oregon has one and it is rediculas how long it takes to draw tags, even a not so good tags. Since Oregon went to a point system the odds to draw decrease dramaticly year after year. The only winner will be the F&G dept.DON'T LET IT HAPPEN!
 
Here's an example of why this I'm against it.

Unit 40 early bull, the hardest elk tag to draw. There were about 650 people that put in for it; it would take 130 YEARS for everyone to draw, if no one re-applied and no new people ever put in for it. You explain how that's better than everyone having a chance, albeit a small one.

And what about kids and new hunters, they will be too far behind the curve to ever catch up on the premier units.
 
What is the reasoning behind the bill? Simply to attract more hunters/applicants (and more revenue)? Or to promote "fairness"? Or to follow more what other western states have done?
 
1 in 650

"so you're saying I have a chance"

Just razzin ya femoralarchery

Part of the problem with discussing "points" is that there are so many systems currently in use with western states.

Colorado's prefence point system only allows those with the most point to draw (other than a couple special circumstances). All CO hunts are draw. Wyoming has a portion of the tags go to the highest point holder and a portion go to the random. No points for residents and there are still "general hunts" for residents. NV is "random" with the bonus points simply giving you a better chance. All hunts in NV are draws.

It is hard to discuss points when everyone has a different thought about "what" points are.

There is money to be made by the fish and game selling points, and there can be a point system where new hunters will still have a chance. I read that 90% of Colorado's resident deer tags could be drawn with 1 point or less.

I would support a bonus point (NV style), not a preference point(CO) system which would simply increase your draw odds if you were unsuccessful in prior years. Especially where there are still OTC hunts in Idaho for both Res/NR if you don't draw a tag.
 
I don't really have a dog in this fight so take it for what its worth.

I have hunted NV and ID both, ID off and on for the last 20+ years. I know both ID and NV have quality deer. The BP system that NV has set up allows you a chance to draw any and every year, i do know people that draw every year.

Myself i can draw pretty much every year if i choose to, i tend to put in for harder to draw areas so on average i draw every 2-3 years, and have a quality hunt weather i draw every year or wait 2-3 for the harder to draw areas.
I think most that are against a BP system see it as only the top point holders get the choice areas and that it takes too long for the beginner to draw it, with NV system thats not always true. CO..yes i think thats true.

On another note:
I know everyone likes to be able to just go buy your tag OTC, and thats nice, except when alot of areas hold few deer and lots of hunters. I know not many like the idea of a total draw system but i think it works to get animal numbers and quality up.
So again take it for what its worth, i just think that a BP system like NV would work, at least it seems to be working here.
 
I can understand to an extent why residents oppose a point system. However what residents need to understand is they need non resident money to make things work.

Also I would only be in favor of a system that is like nevadas. Heck without a point system I would just like to have a chance to draw more than one choice in Idaho.

Part of the complaint from residents would be having to guarantee non residents a set amount of tags likely 10% which is currently the maximum amount that can be had by non residents. But if you look at it as giving up a few tags now to get more later. A point system will generate more revenue than is currently being brought in. So with more money than in turn you should receive better game management which should result in more tags down the line. And you can't deny Idaho needs revenue.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-14-13 AT 06:38AM (MST)[p]If NR money is the key, then guarentee the 10%. In my circle it's the biggest reason we don't play the ID game especially with the cost of the licence.


IMO the "up to" language is tantamount to a bait and switch. There should be a unit/region set aside.

Implementing points all around is probably a bad deal, but if you're going to do it, do it for NR's only, with 50% allocated to max point holders, and 50% in a random fashion to the unsucessful.
 
My biggest problem with idaho a current system as a non resident is that you basically only have a chance at your first choice so don't waste your time trying for a low tag quota hunt. For example units that have a late and early hunt. The late hunt may only have a small handful of tags and since none are guaranteed to non residents you have just blown $160+ on nothing. Even if they would go Tia draw like nevada has with no points just to have a chance at multiple hunts

Pleas don't come to me with your OTC business yes that is all well and good but totally seperate
 
I agree with Bill, it seems that most residents are against a point system and want it left alone.

So give non-residents the 10% guarentee and a point system which will lead to increased revenue for the dept of F&G and leave the resident draw the way it is.
 
Nitis and Bill

Obviously from a non-resident point of view, bonus points are great, but it's the residents who get screwed.

As for guaranteed 10% of tags for non-residents, even without it being guaranteed, non-residents are still getting 10% of the tags in most drawings.

Another thing that Non-residents need to understand and that they often miss is that until the 10% cap is reached, non-residents have the same drawing odds as residents. Tell me where else a non-resident can get the exact same odds as the residents. For example in a drawing with 100 tags, up to 10 can go to non-residents. With a random draw, every non-resident has the exact same odds as the residents until the tenth tag is drawn. In other states where non-res are guaranteed 10% they set them aside and all non-residents are competing for very few tags, but in Idaho you get to be in the big pot with everybody else.

Over time the odds of being drawn in a point system do not increase to a statistical advantage. In the models that I have calculated it would take well over 12 years for anyone to gain a 2 or 3 percentage greater chance than they now have with the random draw. Statistically, that is not even significant enough to make a difference. What does happen is in that same time period it reduces the odds of a new hunter to less than a tenth of a percent chance of being drawn.

Nearly every state has a point system, I think it would be in everyones best interest to have a state where you don't have to get tied up in a decade of playing the points game in order to draw a tag.

I hunt mostly OTC, the few tags that I have drawn have been for cow elk and extra-antlerless deer. I put in for hard to draw tags every year and have yet to draw for a "trophy" area, but that's ok, I still get to hunt in open areas where the trophy potential is just as good as many draw units in other states.

Let's set aside our antler lust and just hunt, if we get a good tag great, if not, then just go hunt and have a good time. Does every state have to cater to the antler junkies and trophy hunters?
 
I get your point but when you apply for a moose/sheep/goat hunt and the 10% cap is hit (by species) before you even get up to bat, that sucks. The tags need to be guarenteed and set aside.


Id rather compete with 100 NRs for a tag than thrown into a pool of thousands.

IMO
 
Realistically, residents only have a chance at their first choice also.

The Idaho first and second choice drawings don't work like tother states and I've seen that confusion come up before. In other states with points sytems, you have to play the game. That means you want to get a tag but you also want to get a good unit. If you put in for hunts with decent odds you get drawn but never build up enough points for a "trophy" unit. So everyone puts in for the trophy units for their first choice, knowing they won't get drawn but just so they can get a point. Then everybody gets shuffled down to the second choice hunts whic I would compare to Idaho first choice draws because then they actually have a chance.

Furthermore, in Idahos second drawing which occurs in August every year for the tags that were leftover or did not get purchased by succesful first draw applicants, there is no 10% cap on non-residents. Every year there are good tags available in the second drawing. Last year there were several units that are considered to be premier trophy units that had between 5 and 30 tags available for rifle bull elk. No 10% cap on that, the non-residents have equal odds with the residents and can even out-draw them.
 
But think about it in units with only one or two tags.
You will be on equal footing with the residents.

I fully understand that Idaho screws the non-residents by forcing them to buy their license before applying, and I think something should be done about that.

The only points sytem that I could support would be a straight bonus system for non-residents that residents could participate in at the non-resident price. They would get 10% of the tags in units with 10 tags or more, but units with fewer than ten tags would remain random under the current system. This way, non-residents get their guaranteed 10% and residents can't get upset that they will be left out.

But I only ask that non-residents focus on what Idaho offers that you can't get elsewhere. Excellent opportunity to hunt every year and a good chance at a respectable animal and the ever present chance of finding a truly large specimen.

Even in hard to draw hunts, in a random draw, statistically you will be drawn at least once in the time it would take to draw with a points system "guarantee". No other success in life comes with a guarantee so lets be adults and not pout when we don't get our turn.

I ask this question, If every time we didn't win the lottery we got a point and a better chance at winning next time, would we all get our turn to be millionaires?
 
I have already commented several times but this is an important issue to me as it will be for my two sons in a few years when they are old enough to hunt.

So besides my own statistical models and my own research into other states and their systems, here is the hard empirical evidence that I see every year, having lived in and hunted in every region of Idaho:

Here is what I see every year. Southern Idaho gets overrun with hunters from Utah who didn't draw a tag because of their points system. Northern Idaho gets overrun with hunters from Washington because they only get tags every 3-5 years because of their point system, and western Idaho gets overrun with hunters from Oregon who didn't draw tags and wont't have the points to draw for a couple more years.

If point systems work so great, then why are hunters from each surrounding state coming to Idaho.
 
I'm a NR so I'll throw in my 2 cents.

I don't apply in Id much any more because there's no incentive for me to be consistent with my applications; 1- no points 2- the fees went through the roof 3- up-front money for the tags 4- no guarantee of the actually percentage of NR tags drawn 5- up-front hunting license fee.

Other States have one or two of these negative factors but ID has them all!

There seems to be plenty who will play the game in ID but I've moved my money and efforts elsewhere.

Maybe in the future I'll be back since I love Idaho in many ways.

Just my thoughts and I respect others who have a different paradigm.

Zeke
 
"If point systems work so great, then why are hunters from each surrounding state coming to Idaho."

I think that is part of the dept of f&g's problem non residents are not comming to Idaho much anymore. Look at the tag sales for the last few years, fewer and fewer non resident tag sales have left huge holes, to the tune of millions, in the budget.

I think that Idaho has a great system for resident hunters and most seem to be happy with it. The division is trying to find a way to increase revenue for the state, one great way to do that and to allow the residents to keep things the way they are is to offer non-residents an incentive to buy a license and apply every year reguardless of weather they come hunting or not.

I agree that the odds of drawing a tag will not change that much if at all, and in-fact it may get harder ecspecially for new hunters, but its hard to argue that offering a point as an incentive for non-residents is not a great way to increase revenue without giving more tags.

As a Side note I think that Non-residents who already have a license are also more likely to buy an over the counter tag if they dont draw elsware.
 
i say let's do it (for the non-residents). charge an a$$ load of money, give them 5% tags, and take away their otc tag option if they don't draw:)
 
We just killed an attempt to implement a resident preference point system in wyo - today. Vote was 30-27 with 3 absent. wheeeeewwwwwww..................

Get on it NOW if you are opposed.
I sat around for 5 or 6 days just pissed and moaning about it. Then it passed both the Senate Committee and full Senate. That's when we knew it was for real and something had to be done.

Don't delay. As a Native of Idaho with lots of Snake River running through my veins, I'll help any way I can.

PM me and I'll give you some of the things we did right. Since you all know about it early in the ballgame, you'll have more opportunities to kill this mess...................

-Cade
www.HuntForeverWest.com
 
>i say let's do it (for
>the non-residents). charge an a$$
>load of money, give them
>5% tags, and take away
>their otc tag option if
>they don't draw:)

Oh, that'll get us there! TIC
Good plan Stan.

Zeke
 
I am well aware of the lost revenue from decreasing NR tag sales, I believe a lot of that is the done economy and perception of lost game to wolves. I also agree that while Idaho has very competitive prices for licenses and tags, we really hurt the NR's by forcing them to buy a license to apply for controlled hunts. I understand it would be hard to sacrifice the $150.00 license price if you only hunt if you draw a tag. I don't know how they could make that better without losing revenue but I agree that something should be done to lighten that burden.

In 2010, the last time we rejected bonus points in Idaho, I spoke to a few IDFG representative that acknowledged to me that a bonus point system would not increase the chance of getting a tag for anobody but that it was being considered because it would give the perception to controlled hunt applicants that they were getting a good deal.

I had already done my own statistical models and knew that but I was shocked that they weren't trying to hide it, because it comes across as an in your face money grab, and I can't believe that people buy into it.

Paraphrasing it went something like "We know that points systems don't improve anything, but people think it does, so if it passes we'll be glad to take their money."

Basically we would all be paying more money for a smaller slice of the pie.

But is not only NR sales that have dropped, look at the numbers of resident hunters over the last decade and you will see a significant decrease there as well.
 
>Paraphrasing it went something like "We
>know that points systems don't
>improve anything, but people think
>it does, so if it
>passes we'll be glad to
>take their money."

IDF&G looked at points in 2010 (report dated 7/7/2010) because the legislature passed the a bill stating they MAY introduce a point system. The commission decided against it after review. From a financial standpoint, the system was to be revenue neutral - it would pay for itself but not provide any profit.

The commision voted today to oppose HB145.
 
If you are a resident of Idaho and you support this bill then you either don't have all of the facts orrrrr you need your head examined. This will hurt the residents chance or drawing by causing many many more people to "get in on the ground floor".

Non residents don't think that you're immune to this. I know all of my non resident friends will be putting in and most haven't in a few years.


Justin
 
As a NR im wondering what ID residents think of this senario?

NR being allowed to apply for more than 1 species in the controlled hunts. I know this is the main reason I dont apply in ID anymore. Hard to justify $160 license that I probably wont use just for an attempt to draw 1 species.
 
i would feel bad for non-residents if they had to buy a license, didn't draw, and had to eat the license. but guess what...IF YOU DONT DRAW YOU STILL HAVE THE CHOICE TO HUNT GENERAL SEASON WITH SAID LICENSE!! it's YOUR choice if you don't use it. and to refresh some of you about the bottom line fundamentals of a point system. listen up...they do NOT ensure you a tag, bottom line. in a point system you give an opportunity to one by taking it away from another.
 
Exactly the only way to increase the odds for one group is to (a) increase tags or (b) take the odds from another group.
Residents ask your self why all of the non res want a point system. Not that I blame them.

Justin
 
Do a point system for nonres to get their money and keep it the same for residents. thats my vote.
Only problem with this is the general units are going to get more pressure becasue someone from utah who already has a license will be more likely to buy a general deer/elk tag
 
>As a NR im wondering what
>ID residents think of this
>senario?
>
>NR being allowed to apply for
>more than 1 species in
>the controlled hunts. I know
>this is the main reason
>I dont apply in ID
>anymore. Hard to justify $160
>license that I probably wont
>use just for an attempt
>to draw 1 species.

Are you talking trohpy species? If you are, I think trophy species should remain as it is now - you can only apply for one. Otherwise, you're just reducing eveyone's chance to draw a trophy species.

If you're talking deer, elk, pronghorns; you can apply for all three today.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-13 AT 09:20AM (MST)[p]So after 3 days I have received one response from one of my three Representatives and this is it...

"Thanks for your input. I'm not liking it on first blush."

What the???

I think this guy had a 3 martini lunch.
 
>>As a NR im wondering what
>>ID residents think of this
>>senario?
>>
>>NR being allowed to apply for
>>more than 1 species in
>>the controlled hunts. I know
>>this is the main reason
>>I dont apply in ID
>>anymore. Hard to justify $160
>>license that I probably wont
>>use just for an attempt
>>to draw 1 species.
>
>Are you talking trohpy species?
>If you are, I think
>trophy species should remain as
>it is now - you
>can only apply for one.
>Otherwise, you're just reducing eveyone's
>chance to draw a trophy
>species.
>
>If you're talking deer, elk, pronghorns;
>you can apply for all
>three today.

I was talking trophy species. I do understand it would reduce the odds though.
 
Would you rather have a 3% chance at 1 species or a 1% chance at 3 diff species?

I like it how it is choose what you really want and you have a better chance at getting it.

Justin
 
As a non resident here is a way I look at it.

My dad has applied for a reasonable controlled hunt every year for te last 10 years or more. There are between 50-80 tags for non residents in this particular hunt depending on the year for non residents. He has never drawn not once. Yet in the last 6 or 8 years I know of two different parties from our same town that have drawn it twice each! So in his case I can't see how a point system wouldn't have benefited him. With the number of applicants on average for that hunt depending on the type of point system used he could draw it every 2-4 years. A lot better than zero out of ten!

I know it's better to be lucky than good but its very frustrating. I will also tell you that I have written letters to people trying repeal or modify California's point system because it is really dumb. The your are screwed. Now the places I like to hunt its not a big deal because I can predict when I will draw and what I will draw but for those that would like to hunt some of the real premium hunts if you do not have max points you will never draw at least not for the next 20+ years.

I will say it again every place should use nevada as a model for how to conduct a controlled hunt draw. And if someone can show me where it's shortcomings are I would love to see it. But I do jot have to worry about throwing a have to hunt away because I tried to draw a hard tag to get cause I I don't get it I might get my next choice. Idaho has more than one hunt I would like to hunt but I can't put in for something with such low odds.

Also if the state wanted to raise some cash why not after the general hunts have been open for so many days or weeks the reduce the price of non resident general deer tags. That would enticed more residents to buy a second tag. Selling 2000 tags for $100 less is better than leaving 4000 unsold. You could leave it only available to residents if that makes you feel warm and fuzzy.

One last thing I think everyone can agree on is something needs to be done about the fish and game department. Whether the answer is more revenue new management or whatever. Idaho is a great place to hunt and explore and there are lots of opportunities for sportsmen. What is surprising about this thread is it appears that more people are receptive to change of some sort this time than last time it was brought up.

Good luck to all in the coming draws in all states
 
>I will say it again every
>place should use nevada as
>a model for how to
>conduct a controlled hunt draw.
>And if someone can show
>me where it's shortcomings are
>I would love to see
>it.

It's shortcomings are in high demand units. Cory Jacobsen (Elk101) outlined this in 2010:

"In 2009, there were 500 applicants for 15 tags in the unit 54 archery draw. Without a bonus point system, the odds of drawing is 3.0%. Under a Nevada-style BP system, a first-time applicant in year 2 would have a 0.6% chance of drawing, while a max point holder (2 points) would have a 3.07% chance. In Year 5, a first-time applicant would have a 0.13% chance of drawing, and a max point holder (5 points) would have a 3.26% chance."

Any bonus or preference point system penalizes youth and first time hunters.
 
Its easy for a non res to have this opinion. If Idaho's system gets all screwed up you will just burn you're points then leave. I will still be in Idaho dealing with the aftermath of this idea.

Justin
 
I do hear/feel NR's complaints about the cost to put in for draws and not receiving anything in return versus other states. The fees and license is ridiculous. Why put in in Idaho and probably get nothing out of it, when I can invest that money in another state and accumulate points to draw a tag in 10-12 years. I definitely can see that argument. It's also tough to justify the time and expenses for a NR to come hunt an OTC tag as it could be a crap shoot or could be killer. (Us residents all know that we are very lucky and that Idaho is a gold mine, IF you work hard enough, even with the wolves and lower herds).

I think that idelkslayer has a lot of great points. I would like to see a bonus point system for NR's ONLY. Personally, I think these point systems are useless and provide little to NO advantage, but if the NR's want a gold star or a pat on the back, give it to them, so that they keep funding our resources and opportunities year after year.

The F&G should also constantly pound the OTC opportunity sales pitch into the faces of hunters in the Western US because many don't realize what we do have and what you can kill here every year, if you bust your ass. Every NR seems to think that the wolves ate ALL of the game. Most Idaho residents on this site know better and keep it to themselves.

I'm absolutely not in favor of any sort of point system for residents.
 
I am a non-res from Oregon and I wish we didn't have a points system and hope Idaho never gets one. Once you make it easy and affordable, too many people apply. In Oregon you have a better chance drawing a sheep tag than you do a great deer, elk or antelope hunt unless you already have over a decade of points saved up. If you are starting at zero right now for a great hunt here, you are 20+ years away from drawing a tag. Points systems like ours are making me want to move to Idaho.
 
Based on this thread so far, and my recollection of previous threads on this subject it seems we Idahoan's are fine with a NR BP system but do not want one for ourselves. While the NR reponses seem closer, there seems to be a slight favor to a BP system so you can get something for your effort. Fine.

Now the rub seems to be in the "guaranteed" percentage of the draw. First I refute most of your claims of how unfair our system is now. If you look, a vast majority of NR draws equal the % of the applicants, and often that is less than 10%. Those times that you get short changed, it is for the same reason some residents get drawn less than the "average". This issue is much more prevelant in low tag draws, like under 50.

While I lean toward NO guaranteed %, because I like random but equal chance, I realize that a BP system is the opposite of that. So, I would propose a guaranty of "the lessor of 10% of available tags, or the % of NR in the applicant pool." One additional caveat before you start complaining about this, "in draws with 10 or less available tag, the NR cap will be 1".

ADDITIONALLY, I still get burned by those that complain, but I know they are coming here to buy OTC tags when other states don't pan out, so I propose some additional restrictions to avoid thi unless you do regularly put in. So I say unles you have paid draw fee's for less than X years, or purchased tags consecutively for less than X years, you pay an additional fee for your tag. This is the benefit of our system and why I believe that F&G chose to require applicants to but licenses, so they could come and hunt OTC hunts, so if you don't want that you don't get that option. Probably you could achieve similar effect by making all units LE draw, possibly with second choice as a viable option, but this then becomes likely more complicated and expensive to administer.

For the record, instead of cater to NR's because of their revenue I would place that burden on residents, and would not balk if it forced out the less dedicated "opportunity" hunters here that think they should hunt for free. I doubt this would fly, but I for one would support it.
 
I am not an attorney and am not giving a legal interpretation for Idaho. The draft bill text is "(D) The commission shall by rule establish procedures relating to the application for the purchase of controlled hunt bonus or preference points by sportsmen and the fee for such application shall be as specified in section 36-416, Idaho Code." The only change is replacing the first "may" with "shall." There is no distinction for residency. Past proposals and discussions in the Commission and agency included no distinctions for residency (all previous rules that were considered would have applied to all applicants). Given the circumstances, I suspect the intent is for the law to apply to all "sportsmen" regardless of residency. A simple interpretation is that the intent of the revised statute is to ensure that a point system is implemented.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager
 
Would you be willing to let us in on what (the word around the office) is?
I want all kids to have as good as or a better chance than me at a good tag. This idea is just selfish and will push youth hunters out of the sport.
Behind this tree is a whole forest people.

Justin
 
>I am not an attorney and
>am not giving a legal
>interpretation for Idaho. The
>draft bill text is "(D)
>The commission shall by rule
>establish procedures relating to the
>application for the purchase of
>controlled hunt bonus or preference
>points by sportsmen and the
>fee for such application shall
>be as specified in section
>36-416, Idaho Code." The only
>change is replacing the first
>"may" with "shall." There
>is no distinction for residency.
> Past proposals and discussions
>in the Commission and agency
>included no distinctions for residency
>(all previous rules that were
>considered would have applied to
>all applicants). Given the
>circumstances, I suspect the intent
>is for the law to
>apply to all "sportsmen" regardless
>of residency. A simple
>interpretation is that the intent
>of the revised statute is
>to ensure that a point
>system is implemented.
>
>Tom Keegan
>IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager
 
Thanks Tom for the information, can you tell us what the next step is in the legislative process,and when would it take affect if innacted. I think most residents are totally against having a point system, if the F&G needs more money i'm for raising the liscence fees,we have the lowest prices for residents now. Just my oppionion,thanks..
 
Rep. Marc Gibbs is the Resources and Conservation Committee Co-Char in which this legislation has originated. He is my representative, and provided me the following response today:

"I don't expect this bill to come before the committee."

I'm not sure what this means as the legislation has clearly been introduced and is in the pipeline. I am optimistic as to his response, but we must keep the pressure on all committee members to vote this bull down.
 
I lived in Wyoming for 10 years and then Colorado for 10 years between 1980 and 2000 and then moved back to Idaho. I lived in a remote area of low population in North Central CO. CO had a point system for their limited draw units. I started trying to get points for a quality elk unit in NE CO starting in about 1991. If I remember correctly, it took 5 pts to get a tag when I started applying. When I moved in 2000, it was taking about 14 in that unit to get a tag! I never did and never would reach the number of points necessary to get a tag. As I understood it, a portion of the tags did go each year on a equal draw basis and my application was in that pool each year. So, I did have an extremely remote chance to draw a tag each year. In reality, I and every other applicant, except those who were ahead of the game w/points, would have been much better off with a straight draw like we have here in Idaho at present. My vote? No preference points. It is a short term fix and works OK for a couple of years then fades to become an unfair and unequal system for allocating tags. I will say this to all of you who may only have 10 or so hunting seasons under your belts....the hunting here in Idaho compared to Oregon, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming...all states I have lived in and hunted in....is far superior with the exception being Wyoming. If you know where to go in WY and have livestock, you can still enjoy some great OTC elk and deer hunting. However, unless things have changed, Wyoming doesn't have a point system either.
 
I've gotten 11 responses thus far from the Reperesentatives I have emailed. Not a single one if FOR the bill and everyone has stated that it will likely not make it to comittee.


If you haven't emailed them already, you need to.
 
>Thanks Tom for the information, can
>you tell us what the
>next step is in the
>legislative process,and when would it
>take affect if innacted. I
>think most residents are totally
>against having a point system,
>if the F&G needs
>more money i'm for
>raising the liscence fees,we have
>the lowest prices for residents
>now. Just my oppionion,thanks..

+1 on raising resident license fees
 

Similar threads

runamuk
Idaho wildlife federation
Replies
10
Views
882
devobrodie
devobrodie
Simpleton
Points are Points
Replies
61
Views
3k
Delta
D
Founder
Montana Mule Deer, Whitetail, Antelope, Archery Elk
Replies
0
Views
595
Founder
Founder

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

96512CF4-19CE-490F-A369-DC4EF391D75A.jpeg
F8C4AE34-A403-4BD9-AE06-2AD2213997C7.jpeg
IMG_8714.jpeg
kKwr7keWQH2bkHDl65ixVQ.jpg
9A111539-D94C-4329-BFCF-0EEBC31B7487.jpeg
IMG_9382.jpeg
PXL_20230910_185526434~2.jpg
IMG_20231010_182606304_HDR.jpg
IMG_0638.jpeg
IMG_0100.jpeg
4028D18D-DD7C-40B9-9F64-C1B078B32006.png
16628.jpeg

Idaho Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Bearpaw Outfitters

Idaho Deer & Elk Allocation Tags, Plus Bear, Bison, Lion, Moose, Turkey and Montana Prairie Dogs.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, whitetail, bear, lion and wolf hunts and spend hundreds of hours scouting.

Jokers Wild Outdoors

Trophy elk, whitetail, mule deer, antelope, bear and moose hunts. 35k acres of private land.

Back
Top Bottom