Limit NR??

[BPKHunter]

I just started building NR points in Wyoming, but the more I look into other states the more I realize how it is getting harder every year across the Rocky Mountain states.

So, should Idaho follow the pack and limit it even more and save more for residents? How much better would SE Idaho be w/out all the Utah hunters?

I don't know that I am advocating the change, but it seems awful hard to get good out of state opportunities and yet we are the hunt of last resort for too many. By increasing costs, that did limit some. What do you think?

 

[destroyer350]

Seems like they have already limited them quite well by offering 2pts and spikes or ragheads on most hunts. But I do agree on tardville rat packing everything, see'ins how they won't let few if any taterheads go play in their backyard!

 

[Moosey69]

The controlled hunts already have a cap of up to %10 of the tags, which is actually lower than Wyoming and Colorado too. So I don't think anyone would say Idaho is too generous there.
And as for OTC the last couple years they have had a hard time selling half the quotas that just a few years ago sold out every year. And some of those tags went to residents as a second deer tag.
And as for SE Idaho that is an area I am very familar with, and an area where alot of residents I know go to fill that second non-res general deer tag. It could realy be an awsome area with just a little management of residents and non-residents alike. Like putting a limit on the amount of hunters in the area for deer like they did for the archery Elk hunt a few years ago.

 

[HNTBIGBULLS]

Here we go again, blame everything on The Utahn's,
Before a person posts something like this, get
some solid facts and numbers.

Call your game and fish and ask them why they
beg me every week to buy a non-res tag!

20 years ago, us Utahn's had buy our tags,
before the end of december or we would
not get one! Last year I believe they had
over 6000 general tags left over!

The price to hunt Idaho for a non-resident
is the highest out of any state, and what
do we get for all that money? Horrible muledeer
managment!

Wake up and don't blame non-res hunters! Blame your
game and fish department!

 

[grizzly]

Please see the IDFG Non-Resident Survey results at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/hunt/misc/09surv.cfm

IDFG relies on NR for 70% of their income.

In addition to that, NR hunters spend $127,000,000 in Idaho each year.

Be careful what you wish for. Without NR, IDFG will be in a world of hurt.

Plus, IDFG has already dramatically reduced NR hunters with their terrible management, which is why they are on a Public Relations kick to get NR money back into their coffers.

We are all NR in every state but one.

Grizzly

 

[brymoore]

LAST EDITED ON May-27-11 AT 10:48AM (MST)[p]>IDFG relies on NR for 70%
>of their income.
>
>In addition to that, NR hunters
>spend $127,000,000 in Idaho each
>year.
>

It's not 70%. The second half of the $127MM quote is that residents spend $132MM. Do the math.

 

[HNTBIGBULLS]

I knew brymooore would chime in
on this, How much do the residents
pay for tags bry?

With the quality of the hunting
right now, if your tags were not
so cheap, would the residents still
spend that much money?

 

[grizzly]

brymoore, And I quote..."Nonresident hunters account for 70 percent of the revenue from big game tag sales in Idaho."

It also says, "There are half as many nonresident hunters as there are resident hunters, yet they spend almost as much as resident hunters on equipment and trip-related items." It gives the numbers of 122,000 resident hunters spending $132 Million and only 65,000 nonresident hunters spending $127 Million.

Check it out.

Grizzly

 

[grizzly]

brymoore, I think you might be confusing the 70% to IDFG verse the $127 Million which is the overall input to the economy.

The resident tag sales to IDFG is $3.8 Million, the nonresident tag sales to IDFG is $9.2 Million. That is 70.7% nonresident money.

Grizzly

 

[Califelkslayer]

Already been said, very well I might add. Thanks.

 

[Pre64]

I think the Feds had a hand in ruining our big game herds.

Keep in mind, management generally means fewer tags, and they did reduce tags this year. No matter what F&G does, someone will complain.

 

[deepforks]

LAST EDITED ON May-29-11 AT 03:07PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-29-11 AT 03:06?PM (MST)

they BEG you every week huh? that, is funny $hit right there. thank you, i needed a good laugh this afternoon. i bet you are #1 on the departments speed dial too. ha ha ha.

 

[HNTBIGBULLS]

I will try and paste the weekly email
I get an have gotten for the past four
weeks.

I don't know if I am #1, but I bet
there are at least 10000 others who
recieve them also!

Don't give me sh#(, IDG&F has done
this to themselves, I dont think you
can blame the Fed's either.

 

[BPKHunter]

I'm sure every state wants your money.

I have no problem with NR vs Residents. Frankly I meet as many good guys from other states as residents and likewise as many turds. My question is more about a way to free up our own in state opportunities. Yes we may have to foot more of the bill as residents in that case, which I am ok with even though I pay for four people every year for draws and tags(3 sons).

Bottom line is that our habitat will only hold so many deer and we don't have as much control over the habitat as we would like, so all we can do is control the "take". To control the take we have to control the hunters. Clearly if you have to cut "opportunity" do you start with NR vs Residents?

We want it all, but clearly we have to make sacrifices so where do we start?

 

[Pre64]

>I will try and paste the
>weekly email
>I get an have gotten for
>the past four
>weeks.
>
>I don't know if I am
>#1, but I bet
>there are at least 10000 others
>who
>recieve them also!
>
>Don't give me sh#(, IDG&F has
>done
>this to themselves, I dont think
>you
>can blame the Fed's either.


Like I said, no matter what F&G does, someone will complain.

The Feds have had more impact on our wildlife recently than any other entity.

BTW, well said BPK. I think they've already started to sacrifice in the form of fewer controlled hunts. They would rather hear grousing from NRs than residents. Just like any other state.

 

[coyotebuster08]

BPK,
I am the hated NR hunter that uses Idaho as a last resort. I have had many memorable hunts there and God willing, expect to have many more.
Each year I receive the mailings from IDFG in the spring and throughout the fall soliciting my participation in Idaho hunting, usually 3 mailings and a handfull of emails. Since most other western states draws occur before Idaho I wait for the controlled Idaho results to finalize my hunting schedule for the year.
After the usual unsuccessful results I plan an Idaho trip, I already have paid for the license and the tag prices are IMO, reasonable.
The Idaho tag structure is geared to attract "last resort" hunters. The issue now is that even these OTC tags are going un-purchased. The financial impact is 6-7 million lost if I remember correctly.
So, does anyone honestly think limiting NR hunters when the tags are going unsold is a solution to any problem? That less NR money going to Idaho will create more deer or opportunity?
I sounds like your trying to increase egg production by killing the chicken to me.
CB08

 

[ARROWHNTR]

I too have contributed thousands to Idaho as a non resident, in my opinion cutting non-resident tags will do little to help Idaho's quality and plenty to hurt the already struggling economy and fish and game department.

I think with the exception of the over the counter tags Idaho's coveted tags are harder to draw then any other states non-resident tag. Most states garentee 10% to non residents unless not enough non residents apply, in Idaho there is no garuntee for Non-Residents its up to 10% can draw but no permits are guarenteed.

 

[coyotebuster08]

A little more food for thought.....
Idaho is one of the few states (Only?) that offers a second deer tag that residents and NR can buy. I have no way to know how many of the residents bought second deer tags at the increased NR price after the August deadline, but for each resident that did, it reflected even a larger number of NR that didn't buy licenses and tags.
It seemed like the decline started in 09' when the deer tags stopped selling out, and then got much worse last year when they sold 40% fewer tags.
If the NR hunters were the problem the herd should be bouncing back by now, unless weather, habitat, and predators are the real problem. Hard to deal with when funding drops significantly.
CB08

 

[springbear]

well said guys, both sides of the coin.

There is no question, Idaho has geared itself to be the last option for many western hunters. Idaho already does limit the NR to some degree. Not sure limiting them "more" will help anything, and it will have some ripple effects in the local economy.

I wonder what would happen in other states if Idaho was not so easy on NR too come hunt. As it is Utah, AZ, NV and now NM with points are basically once in a life time tags for THE OPPORTUNITY to hunt Big Bulls. Idaho is every year, though the odds of killing one are pretty low. Would the other states have to change if "their" residents could not just come up to ID and go hunting...

As far as the Up to 10% vs a assured 10% in the LE tags for NR. I don't think it matters. You have just as good odds of getting a tag either way. You can't look at it after the fact and say that less than 10% went to NR so you got screwed. You as a NR were in the game and had EXACTLY the SAME ODDS as every resident for every tag that was drawn.

 

[ARROWHNTR]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-01-11 AT 01:22PM (MST)[p]Springbear,

True on the 10% odds and im not complaining I think its a fair way to do it, just stating that in most of the western states non residents are gurenteed 10% which in a lot of cases gives them better drawing odds then residents. In idaho the best case for non-residents is to reach 10% worst case 0% goes non-resident.

 

[coyotebuster08]

In many cases NR hunters are their own worst enemy, most of us have a very good idea of the draw odds of every hunt we put in for, and then complain bitterly when we don't draw. The rest never check the odds at all, and then complain bitterly when they don't draw.
I have applied in Idaho for the last 15 years for quality tags and am not surprised that I have never drawn a hunt. But, with the OTC option you don't have to "settle" for a less desireable unit. Probably explains the difficulty in NR quality tag draws eh?
CB08

 

[prn]

>LAST EDITED ON Jun-01-11
>AT 01:22?PM (MST)
>
>Springbear,
>
>True on the 10% odds and
>im not complaining I think
>its a fair way to
>do it, just stating that
>in most of the western
>states non residents are gurenteed
>10% which in a lot
>of cases gives them better
>drawing odds then residents. In
>idaho the best case for
>non-residents is to reach 10%
>worst case 0% goes non-resident.
>

The only western states that give more than 10% to nonresidents are Wyoming and Colorado.

Nevada gives 10%.

Arizona, Utah, Montana, and Idaho all give up to 10%.

New Mexico and Oregon give far less than 10%.

I don't think anybody really knows on California and Washington.

Based on all of this, very few western states "Guarantee" nonresidents 10%.

 

[HNTBIGBULLS]

The Issue with the 10% is, they do
not guarantee 10%, In Idaho, if there
are 100 tags avail. non-res "can" have
10 tags, but if 4000 residents put in and
400 non-res, all that maters is who the
first 100 hunters that are drawn, it could actually
happen that the first 100 are all residents,
that leaves no tags for non-res, because
everyone is put in the same hat.

 

[deepforks]

read the last years draw odds. figure out where you have a better chance at drawing. if you think you're going to get sympathy from residents who know THEY DONT STAND A CHANCE at some of these coveted tags....guess again. nr's should NOT be gauranteed 10% of those....sorry. lots of good otc areas you can hunt. and if our herds and game department are so screwed up, well, you have options.

 

[GSJ]

IDF&G should bring on (another) modest fee increase for residents and a modest decrease for non-residents.

By all means come hunt all you non-residents. Good hunting here for those who want to pursue it. Unless your gonna whine and call for "change" as you see fit. If thats the case please stay home or hunt elsewhere.





the artist formerly known as "gemstatejake".

 

[LIK2HNT]

I enjoy putting in and having a chance to moose hunt every year. I know my odds are long since I apply for a top unit. Yet when I don't draw I can buy an over the counter archery deer tag and have fun hiking the mountains chasing deer.

Bill

 

[BPKHunter]

Well as the draw deadline nears good luck to all. I will be suprised if the system doesn't change in some way by next season. Good luck to all, just don't draw MY tag!!

 

[coyotebuster08]

+1 on the tag increase, I don't see how the department can keep people in the field if they run 6-7 million short on tag revenue again. There is still some room between Idaho and other state's fees.
CB08

 

[tagsoup]

>>LAST EDITED ON Jun-01-11
>>AT 01:22?PM (MST)
>>
>>Springbear,
>>
>>True on the 10% odds and
>>im not complaining I think
>>its a fair way to
>>do it, just stating that
>>in most of the western
>>states non residents are gurenteed
>>10% which in a lot
>>of cases gives them better
>>drawing odds then residents. In
>>idaho the best case for
>>non-residents is to reach 10%
>>worst case 0% goes non-resident.
>>
>
>The only western states that give
>more than 10% to nonresidents
>are Wyoming and Colorado.
>
>Nevada gives 10%.
>
>Arizona, Utah, Montana, and Idaho all
>give up to 10%.
>
>New Mexico and Oregon give far
>less than 10%.
>
>I don't think anybody really knows
>on California and Washington.
>
>Based on all of this, very
>few western states "Guarantee" nonresidents
>10%.



There is no resident vs nonresident cap on Washington tags. Whoever draws, draws.

 

[BCPronghorn]

California allows only a single NR elk tag, a single NR pronghorn tag, and a single NR sheep tag so they are likely the most restrictive.

As for Idaho, welcome non-residents! NRs pay half the bill for 10% of the tags so you won't find me complaining about them. I am a nonresident in 49 othe states (13 of which I plan to hunt in) so we'll see you in the field.

Now if we just had a little more managerial courage at IDF&G to implement what we know is right...