Non-resident bonus point?

nvguy2

nvguy2

Active Member
Messages
759
Hey Idaho guys. I am thinking about putting in for at least 1 more state than I have been putting in for. Was just browsing the Idaho rules and regulations. I can't seem to find anything about preference points. My question is, Does Idaho have a bonus point system? If so, can you purchase a point without having to buy the $154 non-resident hunting license so you can start building points over there. I am guessing there isn't because I can't find it, but somebody told me they did. I would call fish and game, but since it is a saturday morning, I thought I would ask one of you guys. Thanks alot in advance for the info.
 
There is no front of the line here and it starts over the same way every year so everybody has a FAIR chance at drawing a tag. Most non-res. dont agree with it but the majority of res. seem to agree 100%. You can still come buy an OTC tag and come hunt here every year.
 
> There is no front of
>the line here and it
>starts over the same way
>every year so everybody has
>a FAIR chance at drawing
>a tag. Most non-res. dont
>agree with it but the
>majority of res. seem to
>agree 100%. You can still
>come buy an OTC tag
>and come hunt here every
>year.

HeyZues, I'm a NR and I like Idaho's lack-of-point system. I wish everybody was like ID and NM. I hope ID can keep it that way.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.
 
Thanks to everyone for the information. I think I like the idea of a point system that gives someone who don't draw a better chance the next year, but then again I will be starting new and having the same chance as everyone else sounds nice too. Depends on how you look at it I guess. As long as everybody has a chance. I don't agree with certain states, including Nevada, making people purchase an expensive license that they will not use if they don't draw the tag they put in for(Mainly non-residents). Nevada does give the option if you don't want the point, but who doesn't? Comes down to money. Thanks again to all for your info. and thoughts. Think I may put in for Colorado and start earning some points.
 
>Idaho has the best draw system
>...wish they all were this
>way

Ed Zachary




When you go swimming in the ocean, it is very cold, and it makes my willy small
 
I like Idaho's draw system... only way I'd want it to change would be to go to Colorado's draw system with points only units. Non of this middle ground BS, but alas IDFG is too lazy and doesn't have the management skills to go to an all point system so lets keep it the way it is. My .02 anyways

Mike
"~Who says deer don't eat Berger's???"
 
>>Idaho has the best draw system
>>...wish they all were this
>>way
>
>
>EXACTLEY!!


EXACTLY.... Only spelled right :)
 
>i think Idaho's system sucks...IMHO
>
>How to start an argument online:
>
>1. Express an opinion
>2. Wait


Everyone has their opinion. So why?
 
Over time point systems, (either preference or bonus) will distribute the available tags to a wider group of appliciants than with random draws.
With a pure random draw many people will draw multiple times while others will never draw a tag, that's just the way it works.
Fair or unfair? but remember there are some drawbacks to point systems also.
 
I don't agree that point systems "over time... will distribute the available tags to a wider group" of hunters. Over time, point systems distribute almost 0 tags to youth or new hunters. Either you get in early and often, or you will never draw a tag in your hunting life. See Utah's point creep making 60+ year waiting periods for most high-quality tags.

I apply in 6 states every year, haven't ever drawn a good Idaho tag, but still think a true random system (like Idaho) is still the best system. Idaho costs a lot and doesn't allow the OIL species with deer/elk, which is kind of rough, but I love the Idaho system.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-13 AT 09:02AM (MST)[p]Without question point systems distribute tags to a greater variety of people than random draws do, that's by design.
What you like is your opinion, but it cant change the facts.

60 plus year waiting periods for most quality Utah elk tags? you make me laugh.
I have drawn two limited entry bull tags as a nonresident, my 17 year old nephew drew a book cliff bull tag last year with 2 points.

Nevadas youth can draw a buck deer every year under their draw system, myself and a couple friends draw quality deer tags in Colorado every three years, just like clockwork, My brother just drew his second nonres. Wy elk tag in two years, these things all happen under point systems.
 
>these things all happen under point
>systems.

So do things like the same kid drawing a super tag for elk, deer and antelope as well as another antelope tag for unit 40, all within a couple years. Some people are lucky, and some aren't. For those of us who want to hunt Idaho more than twice a decade our system seems fine IMO.

60 years is a stretch, 15-20 seems more realistic for Utah.
 
What about Utahs sheep/goat/moose tags? How long would it be before a new guy (starting now with 0 points) had a decent chance to draw one in Utah?

I don't think he mentioned elk specifically, but why would you want to wait 15-20 years to hunt a premium unit? Right now, I have a chance to hunt my unit of choice in Idaho every year, a small chance, but its the chance I take. And when I draw, I have to wait one year to have a chance again. After you draw in a points system like Utah's, how many years before you have the chance at a premium unit again.
 
The only thing that all NR's can count on is that "opportunity" will only go down over time. Whatever draw odd's you find now, will be less 10 years from now than it is now....everywhere.

I am not speaking to just non-Idahoan, I am including myself when I am thinking about non-Idaho opportunities as well.
 
>I vote to leave the current
>system alone, if it ain't
>broke don't mess with it
>!!!

The only thing that for sure needs to be fixed is the computer system during the week the draw takes place.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-13 AT 05:47PM (MST)[p]>LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-13
>AT 09:02?AM (MST)
>
>Without question point systems distribute tags
>to a greater variety of
>people than random draws do,
>that's by design.
>What you like is your opinion,
>but it cant change the
>facts.
>
>60 plus year waiting periods for
>most quality Utah elk tags?
> you make me laugh.
>
> I have drawn two limited
>entry bull tags as a
>nonresident, my 17 year old
>nephew drew a book cliff
>bull tag last year with
>2 points.
>
>Nevadas youth can draw a buck
>deer every year under their
>draw system, myself and
>a couple friends draw quality
>deer tags in Colorado every
>three years, just like clockwork,
> My brother just drew
>his second nonres. Wy elk
>tag in two years, these
>things all happen under point
>systems.

Piper, do you want some facts instead of anecdotal evidence. Here are facts for NR in Utah on the high quality tags.

3/3288 - Odds of Henry's deer tag -- 1 in 1,096
3/1948 - Odds of San Juan Elk tag -- 1 in 649
1/1489 - Odds of Desert Sheep K.East -- 1 in 1489

These are straight odds and don't factor in points. Factor in points and that same desert sheep tag for a new applicant is less than 1 in 10,000. And remember, you can only apply once per year. Yeah, that seems fair to the youth who had NO chance of applying in the past due to no fault of their own.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.
 
I guess stretching the truth is the norm on here. In Utah 50% of tags go to the top preference point holders, actually its less than 50%.
The rest go in the random draw so everyone has a chance. Its not really a difficult concept to figure out.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-18-13 AT 06:18PM (MST)[p]And a random draw is really going to help? What are the odds of drawing Idahos premier sheep area? I would say that's kind of unfair to the kids too ? then again if a 12 year old draws it and the guy that has put in his entire life doesn't? maybe that's unfair too?

2 of those Henrys tags went in the weighted random draw, so did two of the San Juan elk tags and the single sheep tag did also.
Out of those 7 tags only two were in the preference draw, Doesn't sound so draconian now does it?
 
Unit 11 sheep in Idaho, 493 applicants for 1 tag, unit 54 elk, 1440 applicants for 15 tags,
That's some tough odds. tough on the kids, not to mention us old folks.
 
Piper,what is your'e point,granted there are a very few hunts that have all most no chance of drawing, i use my first choice every year for an Elk and Deer hunt that have less than 10% odds,but usually always draw my second chance. And if i don't we have enough general areas that you can hunt,and if you put in the effort you will have at least a shot.People bring up the argument about the POOR kids that will never have a chance,and that is totally wrong, because there are youth hunts and plenty of over the counter hunts for them to have a great hunt. Every year the most people that complain about Idahos draw system are the N.R., and every year it gets voted down. I myself think the system is a fair one, you can look at all the maximun point holders from other states and all you hear are complaints.If you want to hunt Idaho,come here and hunt,and don't expect to kill a wall hanger,but put in your'e time and enjoy what nature has to offer!!!
 
here is why i don't like Idaho's system, you MUST buy a idaho license to the tune of $140+ just to be in the draw.
i have put in for deer and elk in idaho for 20+ years i have draw 1...yes 1 deer tag, i put in for a unit that is traditionaly 33% to 50% draw.with a point system i would have drawn 8 to 10 tags. elk have been 10% to 20% so 2 to 4 tags.

in contrast

UTAH: 25 years
3 BULL tags
1 DEER tag
2 SHEEP tags

WYO: 20 years
1 BULL tag
10+ DEER tags
8 ANTELOPE tags

NEV:12 years
1 DEER
1 ELK
1 ANTELOPE

COLO: 14 years
2 BULL
3 DEER

ARZ: 7 years
1 BULL

NM: 6 years
1 BULL
 
brdhuntr, No real point, I'm just responding to exaggerations of all kinds. I have hunted Idaho quite a bit in the past, have even drawn a few limited deer tags over the years. Im seriously thinking about putting for a few tough draws in this year, and then probably hunting Whitetails come November.
 
Here is why I do like Idaho's system.

My license is only $12.75 :)

Idaho (The Last 4 years):

4 Deer
5 Bull
4 Bear Tags if I had chosen to hunt them.

If you are confused by this, then you obviously aren't an Idaho resident.
 
Ive lived in Idaho for all my 39 years. Out of those ive hunted antelope, deer and elk 26 years. Some years on controlled hunts and some years on general tags. Either way im hunting. What states do you get a chance at like that any more. Not the ones with a point system. And for all the people that say there are no good animals left to hunt your very wrong.
 
>i have put in for deer
>and elk in idaho for
>20+ years i have draw
>1...yes 1 deer tag, i
>put in for a unit
>that is traditionaly 33% to
>50% draw.with a point system
>i would have drawn 8
>to 10 tags. elk have
>been 10% to 20% so
>2 to 4 tags.

You are assuming those numbers based on odds staying the same if it went to a point system, pretty sure it wouldnt.
 
Unit 11 sheep in Idaho, 493 applicants for 1 tag, unit 54 elk, 1440 applicants for 15 tags,
That's some tough odds. tough on the kids, not to mention us old folks.


So if Idaho went to a point system, and everyone stayed the course it is easy math on the Sheep tag 493 years to draw if you get in on the ground floor. Next on Elk unit 54 it would only be 89 years to run through the first wave. Sounds great. No points is as good as it gets.

DZ
 
+1 DZ

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.
 
Give the NR's their point system, but you don't get to hunt OTC here any more. Period.

You don't get it both ways.

And yes, your LE draw odd's will go down noticeably for the current LE hunts. You will be able to draw every year for hunts like unit 39, 73, etc. but eventually that will be every couple years, just like in Nevada.

But you will get something for the cost of that license, just not a chance to hunt every year like you do now. Works for me, but I'm a resident.
 
usually always draw my second chance?

How is that possible? The only way is if you are putting in for an antlerless hunt. Look at the draw odds and how many people are drawn for a Second choice.


Not in favor of a Point System!
 
A couple things for Idaho residents...... It has come out that last year a non resident from Washington drew a sheep tag but claims he wasnt "Notified' he had drawn the tag even though 2000.00 was taken from his account by IDFG and it is HIS responsability to check. He now is demanding another tag which IDFG is giving to him for a 2014 hunt in unit 11. This is total BS and we all need to complain and I hope you all place calls to your region's office and the directors office. If I was applying for a tag I would check every dang hour for days and so would most of you....he had his chance and blew it... The other species if you dont pick up your tag it goes back up..

I also have a question since this topic is about non residents drawing... why should they get 10% of tags for hunts?? Because they will pay more? I would pay their price to get the odds they get on some very good hunts where residents odds are double and triple of drawing that same tag. I know several non residents from oregon that draw greatly coveted tags in Idaho regularly.
 
I didn't look this up but I believe it is up to 10% of the tags. It is not a guaranteed 10%. If your friends from Oregon draw it is because they are lucky. Residents have better chance at every tag. In Utah it is a reserved 10% and lot of those hunts NRs have better odds.

DZ
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-21-13 AT 12:15PM (MST)[p]Well looked up several hunts from 2011 and all but one were 10%. The one that wasnt they got 3 tags out of the available 40 ....they have to be separated from the residents to be averaging this..... 4 out 0f 40 tags went to 77 non who applied... thats much better odds than what residents were exposed to by a hell of a bunch and yes it always takes some luck. Its also odd how many guys do draw so frequently.A coworker has drawn one of the harder late buck tags 8 times in the last 20 years...he was furious he didnt draw last fall i felt very bad for him..haha
 
>usually always draw my second chance?
>
>
>How is that possible? The
>only way is if you
>are putting in for an
>antlerless hunt. Look at
>the draw odds and how
>many people are drawn for
>a Second choice.
>
>
>Not in favor of a Point
>System!


I do usually draw my elk second choice and it is a cow permit, there are some units that rarely ever fill on the first choise draw.
 
6540elk_stats.jpg


I made this spread sheet of the first 10 elk draw results from 2012. The three columns on the right I added to show what percentage draws. The NR drew 10% 3 times and they drew the max allotted tags 7 of the 10 times. 2 of the draws were less than 10 tags and they didn't draw one. And only one time did they not draw their max tags allotted to them. 2 of the 10 times they did have better drawing odds within their groups which are not really true because they only affect the NR and not the residents, once they hit the 10% mark they are done. Here is a paragraph copied from the fish and game site.

Nonresident Tag Limitations:
In controlled hunts with 10
or fewer tags, not more than one nonresident tag may be
issued. In controlled hunts with more than 10 tags,
except
unlimited controlled hunts, not more than 10 percent of
the tags may be issued to nonresidents.
Note:
If a resident
applies for a controlled hunt on a group application with
a nonresident, and the 10-percent nonresident limitation
has been met, the entire group application will be rejected,
including any residents.

DZ
 
Ok so lets just say that no point system is adopted

Why not allow a slight change to the draw system.

This spreadsheet shows one of the serious faults with the draw system in place.

I as a non resident have to buy a license to apply but I really only have a chance at drawing my first choice and its possible that no non residents get a tag at all for some hunts. So why not operate the draw like nevada where they draw the hunters rather than draw by each hunt?

There are some late hunts that would be awesome to try and draw but when you only have one choice. It's tough to check that hunt
 
residents would bawl if they thought nonresidents were to get 10% of the available tags, as it is now nonresidents don't receive anyway near 10%.
The only way to have a separate drawing for nonresidents would be if they received a set quota.
 
NR are thrown into the same draw as the R are. Therefore the draw odds for both are the same, well technically worse for the NR since they can get only up to 10 percent of the tags. I cant believe some think ten percent of the tags going to NR is too much.
 
I agree. If I was Idaho Fish and Game I would like to know what my budget was going to be in the future. I would allocate 10% of the tags like Utah does to know how much money would be coming in. I get tired of hearing how good the NR have it. I'm a NR that pulls tags out of the Resident pool. I bought my lifetime license before I moved away. There are plenty who would pony up the NR price to have a draw tag if there was not enough NR to fill the 10% quota. Things are tough on the home front for all fish and game departments and they are getting some smooth talking folks at their door talking about how much money they can generate for them if they can auction off half of the premium tags. You wait and see as there are always talks going on behind the scenes on how to make the dollars line up. It is only a matter of time before it becomes a rich man?s game.

DZ
 
Ill think about you guys wanting your bonus points this season while im hunting and have a good laugh!!!
 
The first thing Idaho should "fix" is the state's allocation of non resident tags. How would Idaho residents who apply each year in Wyoming feel if Wyoming decided to cut the NR quota from a very generous 20% to no more than 10% and as little as 0% with no point system? I suspect these same greedy, self-serving Idaho residents would ##### and moan...
 
Your more than welcome to move here and become a resident. Then you can voice your opinion on how Idaho manages its game. Until then STFU
 
Wow customweld. I didn't know you had to be a resident to voice your opinion. I would want all interested parties to voice their opinions so all issues could be talked about. NR do spend a lot of $ and maybe they should have a say. I voice my opinion in Idaho, Wyoming and Utah where I spend $s. I respectfully disagree with you.

DZ
 
I would be fine with any state adjusting their tag allocation to benefit their residents. I have never hunted out of Idaho and I don't foresee the need to hunt in another state, I don't expect any other state to convenience me over its own citizens. Each state should protect the rights of their citizens to have access to hunt the animals close to them.

The way I see it, the opinions and desires of residents should always out weigh non-residents. At the end of the day it is the residents who have to continue to live with whatever system is implemented while those who hunt in various states aren't stuck with the consequences.

The fact is that while most other states have gone to a point system to attract non-residents, Idaho has taken a different route. Instead of points, Idaho offers the same drawing odds to NR's as residents until the 10% cap is met, and a guaranteed tag OTC if they don't draw. In many cases NR don't even acount for 10% of applicants.

In my opinion a lot of people have their hunt planning all backwards. Rather than plan on draw hunts as a primary focus, we should plan on the OTC hunts as our primary hunt and anything we draw woud be a happy bonus.
 
I agree with you idelkslayer when you say plan your hunt around the OTC tag and be thankful to get a LE hunt. I'm a Wa resident and I've been putting in over here for 10+ yrs with our point system and haven't drawn a damn thing.

I deer hunt Idaho every year, so why not put in for $14? That's about as cheap as your gonna get and the draws aren't rigged by some BS point system either. They also aren't flooded with people who have a high amount of points, therefore you pretty much have the same odds year after year. It blows my mind that there are people who think that NR's deserve a certain amount of tags?? I'm just thankful that I can hunt OTC mule deer there from Aug 28th to the middle of Dec.
 
>Your more than welcome to move
>here and become a resident.
>Then you can voice your
>opinion on how Idaho manages
>its game. Until then STFU


Real class act.....

How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait
 
I think it's funny that so many NR's complain about the cap, given the great OTC access we have compared to all the other western states.

Part of the reason you don't get some of your tags is because you don't represent much of the applicant pool. In 22 of 41 available LE Buck hunts in 2011, NR's represented less than 10% of the applicant pool. Surprisingly, in 21 of thos 22 LE hunts, you didn't get 10% of the tags.

No wonder you want a guaranteed 10%, you think you deserve better draw odd's for our LE Hunts than us resident's should have.

I bet every state favors their residents in for LE tag allocations in some way. Either they get most of the tags like Colo(no more than 65% or no more than 80%) or Wyo(where residents can OTC hunt famous units like G/H that NR's have to spend points on).

Nevada is just a marketing gimick. Only 1:8 NR's who want to hunt buck's in that state even get the chance, for any hunt. Hell only 1:3 residents get the chance to hunt bucks. Try and pick a decent hunt and the odd's go to 1:20. For Elk it's like 1:50. Here you can hunt a buck EVERY year. Here even guys the first year get the same odd's 1:8, to draw a LE hunt, even if that's all you want to do. And to top it all off, in Nevada you have to buy a license just to put in wether you hunt or not.

So enough already about how you NR's get screwed here by the 10% max rule. NR's are at a disadvantage in every state, at least you can HUNT here.
 
Hey CUSTOMEWELD, I wish I knew what "STFU" means, however I was not taught white-trash acronyms while in college, sorry!

I wish bpkhunter made a compelling argument, however he did not even come close. ANYONE CAN hunt deer, elk and antelope EVERY YEAR in WY, TOO, so what is his point? He is suggesting NR hunters should be satisfied hunting a mismanaged OTC hunt unit and don't deserve a fair chance at a limited entry tag?

My point is simple, Idaho gives fewer tags to NR hunters than just about any other state. A NR quota as little as Zero percent to a max of only ten percent is unquestionably selfish in favor of Idaho residents. If NR hunters have no point system and are not guaranteed a single tag in any unit, why should NR hunters waste their time and money in your state???

You should remember that when states like WY generously give a guaranteed 20% to our NR hunters!
 
I agree with bou. Maybe if Idaho raised the quota for non residents they would have the funds to actually manage their wildlife for a change.
 
OTC units can be just as good as any LE unit if you know how and where to hunt. I believe Idaho can manage a little better but we dont need to be managed for trophy hunting.
 
> OTC units can be just
>as good as any LE
>unit if you know how
>and where to hunt. I
>believe Idaho can manage a
>little better but we dont
>need to be managed for
>trophy hunting.

+1 HayZeus

Most NR's just simply don't understand the quality of animals that dudes (residents and smart NR's) on here routinely see/sometimes kill, every year in Idaho in OTC units. You simply buy your tag at Wal-Mart on your way to camp and come hunt.

To be honest, I don't have experience hunting some of these other states but from the research I've done, these other states "OTC" units seem to be literal crap shoots.
 
it's simple. if you don't like it, DO NOT come here. it seems that the non-residents that like to piss and moan, every year, seem to think that idaho OWES them something. guess what...WE DON'T. to the non-residents that know what idaho has to offer and enjoy coming here, that's great and we welcome you. could every western state be managed better...sure. do we need the arogant opinions of some non-residents...no. again, please refer to my first sentence if you are one of these. believe it or not, idaho's hunting opportunities will not crumble if you decide to never come back. if it means i have to pay more because some out of staters turn their noses up and don't come here to hunt, i'll do it in a heartbeat as i'm sure all idaho residents would.

and it is hilarious how these cry-babies think there are no chances at quality critters with an OTC tag. go ahead and keep thinking that way. just fine with me.
 
I love hunting Idaho. I haven't had a deer tag in my home state of Utah for 10+ years. It is worth it for me to spend the money to hunt Idaho. I have only killed one deer in all that time, but the experience is better than Utah.

I have one beef with IDFG and their management (and it is totally selfish). I wish they would've left the NR cap on Southeast Idaho deer tags. NR could always still buy the tags OTC, but they were usually gone by summer. Once IDFG removed that cap, the area was flooded with more NR (mainly Utahns) and the hunt became much less fun.

I've never drawn a decent Idaho tag (except a Unit 32 bear tag this year), but I hope to draw a deer/elk tag soon.

Idaho has great OTC hunts. You just have to spend a few years to learn the area and how to work with landowners to access public property behind their land. A lot of landowners don't like Utah residents hunting on their property, but I spent the first couple years introducing myself and eventually they started letting me hunt on their property. I even take them a Christmas present each year.

Now one phone call in the fall is all it takes to get access for the year. One guy even said that if I ever shoot a deer behind his property that he will give me a key to his gate so I can get an ATV to it (he only allows walk-in access).

I have found if you treat the residents with respect, they appreciate somebody who is willing to hunt hard and will always be extremely nice, regardless of what state you are from. They just don't want to be taken advantage of, which I totally understand.

I hunt in Idaho more than any other state, have contributed thousands in tag fees to IDFG, and look forward to going back this year. I, for one, hope IDFG keeps heading down the path of no Bonus Points.

Grizzly

PS. Tristate, please be an adult and respect my wishes that you do not respond to any of my posts. I, in turn, will do you the courtesy of not responding to any of yours. I simply do not wish to converse with you.
 
I think the large amount of hostility coming from resident hunters is due to the fact that they do not want to give a single tag to a non resident if they do not have to. Instead they pretend that any non resident hunter who feels zero percent of the quota may not be fair is "complaining."

Deepforks must not hunt out-of-state much, otherwise maybe some of Idaho's blue-collar workforce may understand reciprocity???

Unlikely.
 
All of you nonresidents that want more tags make valid points. But you are wasting your time doing it here. I am a resident and I agree with a lot of what is being said, but I'm for damn sure not going to go to the F&G and lobby to give more of my tags to NRs. If the F&G decides to give more tags to you NRs, then so be it, but don't be surprised when we don't jump at the opportunity to take them out of our pocket and put them in yours.

If you really want to make a difference and have your opinions heard, call the F&G. They are the ones that want your $$, not me. None of your best arguments and none of your anger/passion/excitement here will make any difference in the future.

With that being said, it all comes down to if you like it, spend your money, if you don't like it, don't bother. No one is forced to hunt here or anywhere else.
 
Well the good thing about Idaho for me as a non res is that the application deadline is so late I know about all my other applications before I have to decide if I will donate to Idaho.

This works out really well for me since its hard for me to justify going out of state more than once a year to hunt since I have a young family that has needs like Disneyland and trips that they need.

I also know that I am not the only one that does this meaning that there are many years that many people don't apply. And when they don't apply try don't buy a license and when they don't buy a license they do not send money to Idaho. But if there was a point system you would get my money every year just saying.

Yes you have some great opportunity for OTC hunts and they are very appreciated. Removing the cap on southeast was a blunder. But I am not planning every fall around an OTC hunt there are many other states to hunt.

So if nothing changes I'm good with it I am just saying they are leaving money on the table. But it's also frustrating to watch your dad apply religiously for over ten years for one hunt that does not have rediculous odds and never draw it once and then see several others draw it two or three times in that same time period
 
Juniper is right about one thing, I DON'T HUNT OUT FOF STATE MUCH,BECAUSE EVERYTHING I NEED IS RIGHT HERE,INCLUDING NO PREFERENCE POINTS!!
 
I think it's more than fair for the nonresidents to have the exact same odds as me going into any LE draw. I don't see a valid point in holding two separate draws.

That being said, I fully support Idaho adopting a bonus point system. To say a bonus point system is "unfair" doesn't make sense to me.
 
I moved to Idaho just for more hunting opportunity. I like the draw system the way it is. I have tons of pts. for Mule Deer in the other states but cant draw. At least in Idaho you have the same chance to draw as anyone.
 
>I think it's more than fair
>for the nonresidents to have
>the exact same odds as
>me going into any LE
>draw. I don't see a
>valid point in holding two
>separate draws.
>
>That being said, I fully support
>Idaho adopting a bonus point
>system. To say a bonus
>point system is "unfair" doesn't
>make sense to me.

I like it the way it is, but its not really the same odds for non-res
We can only get 10% of tags total! Last year I put in for a unit that had 90 tags and only one went to non-res
 
>>I think it's more than fair
>>for the nonresidents to have
>>the exact same odds as
>>me going into any LE
>>draw. I don't see a
>>valid point in holding two
>>separate draws.
>>
>>That being said, I fully support
>>Idaho adopting a bonus point
>>system. To say a bonus
>>point system is "unfair" doesn't
>>make sense to me.
>
>I like it the way it
>is, but its not really
>the same odds for non-res
>
>We can only get 10% of
>tags total! Last year I
>put in for a unit
>that had 90 tags and
>only one went to non-res
>

That's got nothing to do with the 10% cap. It has to do with the number of resident applications vs NRs. You have the same odds as everyone else in the draw until the 10% cap has been achieved.

If you count all the controlled deer hunts, buck and doe, not including any unlimited or special weapon hunts, NRs accounted for 9.9% of the total application pool last year (2012). To me, 10% seems fair.
 
>>I think it's more than fair
>>for the nonresidents to have
>>the exact same odds as
>>me going into any LE
>>draw. I don't see a
>>valid point in holding two
>>separate draws.
>>
>>That being said, I fully support
>>Idaho adopting a bonus point
>>system. To say a bonus
>>point system is "unfair" doesn't
>>make sense to me.
>
>I like it the way it
>is, but its not really
>the same odds for non-res
>
>We can only get 10% of
>tags total! Last year I
>put in for a unit
>that had 90 tags and
>only one went to non-res
>

That's exactly my point. Your odds never got worse than the residents because the 10% was never hit. Until it is, you have the same odds as me. Your complaint only works if 9 nonresidents drew early on and you were #10. How often does that really happen?
 
>>>I think it's more than fair
>>>for the nonresidents to have
>>>the exact same odds as
>>>me going into any LE
>>>draw. I don't see a
>>>valid point in holding two
>>>separate draws.
>>>
>>>That being said, I fully support
>>>Idaho adopting a bonus point
>>>system. To say a bonus
>>>point system is "unfair" doesn't
>>>make sense to me.
>>
>>I like it the way it
>>is, but its not really
>>the same odds for non-res
>>
>>We can only get 10% of
>>tags total! Last year I
>>put in for a unit
>>that had 90 tags and
>>only one went to non-res
>>
>
>That's got nothing to do with
>the 10% cap. It has
>to do with the number
>of resident applications vs NRs.
>You have the same odds
>as everyone else in the
>draw until the 10% cap
>has been achieved.
>
>If you count all the controlled
>deer hunts, buck and doe,
>not including any unlimited or
>special weapon hunts, NRs accounted
>for 9.9% of the total
>application pool last year (2012).
>To me, 10% seems fair.
>

Nonresidents should not have better odds than the residents. I'm fine with a system where you and I are in the draw together. When nonresidents account for way more than 10% of the application pool, you then may have a valid argument for guaranteed tags.
 
>>>I think it's more than fair
>>>for the nonresidents to have
>>>the exact same odds as
>>>me going into any LE
>>>draw. I don't see a
>>>valid point in holding two
>>>separate draws.
>>>
>>>That being said, I fully support
>>>Idaho adopting a bonus point
>>>system. To say a bonus
>>>point system is "unfair" doesn't
>>>make sense to me.
>>
>>I like it the way it
>>is, but its not really
>>the same odds for non-res
>>
>>We can only get 10% of
>>tags total! Last year I
>>put in for a unit
>>that had 90 tags and
>>only one went to non-res
>>
>
>That's exactly my point. Your odds
>never got worse than the
>residents because the 10% was
>never hit. Until it is,
>you have the same odds
>as me. Your complaint only
>works if 9 nonresidents drew
>early on and you were
>#10. How often does that
>really happen?

Unit 70 has not reached 10% in a few years. When I called the field office they told me its because the more popular units fill the 10% total faster and that its state wide total like you said. I just would like to see it 10% per unit.
Don't get me wrong I love Idaho just want to draw an LE tag
 
Up to 10% per unit is what I was told but could be less 10% was hit in other units but I could be wrong.
 
>
>Unit 70 has not reached 10%
>in a few years. When
>I called the field office
>they told me its because
>the more popular units fill
>the 10% total faster and
>that its state wide total
>like you said. I just
>would like to see it
>10% per unit.
>Don't get me wrong I love
>Idaho just want to draw
>an LE tag


I didn't look at all years, but you say Unit 70 has not reached 10% NR, because of some statewide cap. Well here are the numbers from 2011 when I did download and review the LE data.

Statewide: NR's represented 9.7% of Limited LE tags drawn, therefore did not reach a statewide 10% Cap. NR's only made up 10.3%.

Unit 70: NR's made up only 29 of 1214 first choice applicants in this unit, representing only 2.4% of the pool. NR's drew 6 of the 175 tags, or 3.4%. So NR's drew disproportionatly more of the tags than represented in the pool.

This is why currently a 10% cap seems to be about the right amount, because that is about how much of the pool you make up. I get that if you didn't see this, you would think 10% is a small amount.

Compare this to say Colo for the same year. NR's made up 36% of the applicants but only drew 19.4% of the tags. Residents enjoyed double the draw odd(53% vs 24%). Remember Colorado caps NR's at either 20% or 35% depending on certain factors.

On top of this, I would argue that most states draw stats include all avail tags to NR's while ours are only for LE tags and don't include Unlimited LE or OTC units.

Using a similar comparison to Colo, since they have no OTC deer tags, the 13,587 NR hunters represents the entire pool. In Idaho we would have about 11,500 OTC tags avail, plus 914 draw tags available, or almost the same amount as colorado.

It's apples and oranges because no matter what, Colorado has a lot more deer, but this tells you that even they don't give equal access to the NR's.

Nevada doesn't even have 1900 NR deer tags available in the whole state including Rifle, Archery, and Muzzleloader. Draw odd's are 8:1 for NR for any Rifle hunt. The poor residents don't even get to hunt every year.

With such liberal opportunity here in Idaho, why should we guaranty a higher %??? Maybe if we make all 13,000 tags LE that will make NR's feel more special.
 
>>
>>Unit 70 has not reached 10%
>>in a few years. When
>>I called the field office
>>they told me its because
>>the more popular units fill
>>the 10% total faster and
>>that its state wide total
>>like you said. I just
>>would like to see it
>>10% per unit.
>>Don't get me wrong I love
>>Idaho just want to draw
>>an LE tag
>
>
>I didn't look at all years,
>but you say Unit 70
>has not reached 10% NR,
>because of some statewide cap.
> Well here are the
>numbers from 2011 when I
>did download and review the
>LE data.
>
>Statewide: NR's represented 9.7% of
>Limited LE tags drawn, therefore
>did not reach a statewide
>10% Cap. NR's only made
>up 10.3%.
>
>Unit 70: NR's made up
>only 29 of 1214 first
>choice applicants in this unit,
>representing only 2.4% of the
>pool. NR's drew 6
>of the 175 tags, or
>3.4%. So NR's drew
>disproportionatly more of the tags
>than represented in the pool.
>
Yea, and unit 70 2012 had 49 NR apps and 1 tag went to a NR
So it's like 6.48% of the apps and 0.131% of the tags
All I can speak for is what they told me at the Field office in that area
If your told 10% of tags go to NR than to me your looking for a area that you have a chance to draw and it sucks when you put in for it and only one person draws a tag. Like I said I not making a big deal about it, I'm just telling you the way it was explained to me.

>
>This is why currently a 10%
>cap seems to be about
>the right amount, because that
>is about how much of
>the pool you make up.
> I get that if
>you didn't see this, you
>would think 10% is a
>small amount.
>
>Compare this to say Colo for
>the same year. NR's
>made up 36% of the
>applicants but only drew 19.4%
>of the tags. Residents
>enjoyed double the draw odd(53%
>vs 24%). Remember Colorado
>caps NR's at either 20%
>or 35% depending on certain
>factors.
>
>On top of this, I would
>argue that most states draw
>stats include all avail tags
>to NR's while ours are
>only for LE tags and
>don't include Unlimited LE or
>OTC units.
>
>Using a similar comparison to Colo,
>since they have no OTC
>deer tags, the 13,587 NR
>hunters represents the entire pool.
> In Idaho we would
>have about 11,500 OTC tags
>avail, plus 914 draw tags
>available, or almost the same
>amount as colorado.
>
>It's apples and oranges because no
>matter what, Colorado has a
>lot more deer, but this
>tells you that even they
>don't give equal access to
>the NR's.
>
>Nevada doesn't even have 1900 NR
>deer tags available in the
>whole state including Rifle, Archery,
>and Muzzleloader. Draw odd's
>are 8:1 for NR for
>any Rifle hunt. The
>poor residents don't even get
>to hunt every year.
>
>With such liberal opportunity here in
>Idaho, why should we guaranty
>a higher %??? Maybe
>if we make all 13,000
>tags LE that will make
>NR's feel more special.
 
The cap is 10% per unit as long as it does not exceed 10% statewide. If the 10% statewide quota is met then no non-residents can be drawn in any remaining controlled hunts.

For deer and elk I don't think the 10% statewide cap gets reached because I always see that non-residents have been drawn in nearly every controlled hunt. Where it matters is for mountain goat and bighorn sheep where the overall tag allotment is low so after only half a dozen non-residents get drawn, all others are shut out. If this were not the case then as many as half of the mountain goat and bighorn sheep tags could go to non-residents. Most of these hunts only have 2-4 tags so even a single non-resident being drawn means 25-50% of that unit went to NRs.
 

Similar threads

B
Unit 54 vs 55, 2nd Rifle Mule Deer
Replies
25
Views
3k
bcmulie
B
BrowningRage
Recommendation Gen Season Rifle Deer for family?
Replies
1
Views
477
BrowningRage
BrowningRage
Simpleton
Points are Points
Replies
66
Views
4k
Dryfly
D

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

D2B160AF-62B4-4080-A3A3-D372658FF8DE.jpeg
34CB8C14-B486-453E-A43E-C658144E831B.jpeg
1635965D-7A82-42A8-8DCF-0A60F5FBC414.jpeg
C2BB6A59-557C-4632-9701-673B580B8B25.jpeg
7BC17BF2-3A79-4719-95EC-998C69DEFAED.jpeg
A9C30B79-C5DC-4141-A5D0-ADB506FB4CD8.jpeg
IMG_7229.JPG
116 copy copy.jpg
IMG_1212.MOV
4A2B6FCD-771F-43BA-A3F0-AB024672ABEA.png
EDB796AB-F125-4812-B650-4FB5E56E9037.jpeg
0658DB72-B807-464E-A60F-B190134772C9.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