Game Mgmt. Council Meeting Notes - 2015-17 season proposals, baiting etc.

[whacker1]

One absolute way to increase odds for the OIL tags, go back to when you had to purchase the tags first to put in.  Most people wouldn't shell out the money to apply, in my opinion.

I would agree
other suggested narrowing the number of choices would help, which I would agree with.

[JimmyHoffa]

Seems as though wdfw is in a short term game of pacifying hunters with focus on their form of harvest, as in our monies........they want our money and dont want to fix things or right wrongs to earn it..........

They're probably too uncertain (pessimistic maybe?) about the long term.  Predators and greenies, kind of look at the future of steelhead fishing as an example--the lawsuit that stopped hatchery plants in PS region. 

[Curly]

"For example, 75% of the any moose tags went to applications with 10 or more points. If highest point holders is defined as anyone with 10 or more points, then giving 25% to them changes nothing"

If it's true that this changes nothing, then I am fine with that "change".   

When I pointed out the origninal 10pt cutoff and the stats Bob posted...that is when Dave Ware said they are re-evaluating the cutoff "point".  I think they realized 10+ pts already get the majority of the tags...Dave was clear that they want to set the limit where it makes an appreciable difference to draw odds.  To me, this means that you basically have to set it so that the 25% of tags are given to the max point holders (or something close).

If we look at "any moose" tags as an example...there are 1504 people who had 15+ points in 2013.  There are 82 any moose permits.  If we reserved 25% of them for 15+ point holders (21 permits) it would take 72 years for all of the 15+ point holders to get a tag under this new system designed to appease the high point holders.  If we set the cutoff at 19 points, then the 12 applicants with those 19 or more points would be guaranteed a tag the following year.  I don't believe it is appropriate that high point holders should be entitled to tags...WDFW says they get a lot of feedback about hunters with high point totals wanting improved draw odds...BS...all levels of point holders want improved draw odds!  If WDFW implements this, it will only result in substantial point creep and more complaints about absurdly low draw odds.  Like all ponzi schemes...a few in at the base level could stand to do quite well though.

If WDFW's objective is to improve draw odds the easiest thing they could do is find ways to reduce applicants.  I personally beleive we could come up with revenue neutral options and still improve draw odds.  I'm starting to think maybe there are a few upcoming WDFW retirees who have not drawn their moose/sheep/quality elk etc tags yet...time to make a few changes so they have something to do in retirement   

How come Dave Ware is still involved in things like the draw system?  Shouldn't he be in his new wolf position?

His category system is idiotic and the tweaks he's talking about is just making it even worse.

[CarbonHunter]

Idahohuntr- was there any talk about giving hunters the option of returning unwanted permits?  This idea was brought up at the Tacoma town hall meeting last fall and a lot of the people attending liked the idea of having the option. Just curious if the idea got squashed already.

As for the idea of giving the last 25% of the permits available to people who have been financially supporting the game department for the last 10-20 years?  What's wrong with that?  I support it even though it doesn't do much.

For sum reason we always have these newbies entering the hunting sport with this sense of entitlement that they should get the best tags within a few years of entering the draw. I feel the best tags should go to the people who are patient and keep putting in year after year.

Most people who put in for the OIL tags only put in for a few years and they give up. They will still have the chance of drawing the first 75% of the tags and I feel that is good enough.

As for hunter recruitment?  The more hunters you see in washington- the less Opportunity for the rest of us. The state is clear that they feel there is pretty of wildlife and we already have twice as many hunters as we have elk.   

I agree that the best way to fix this is to simply limit the choices or do away with the categories. Before the days of the categories we had to choose if we wanted a easy draw (antlerless) or hold out for something better (quality). You couldn't choose both but the whiners (those who were holding out but still wanted an antlerless tag without losing there points) convinced the state to give us the category system. And the state won't pass on revenue or an easy fix and now here we sit about 5 years later trying to apply more band aids.

One thing  is for sure though: Everytime the state applies a band aid- hunters get more to complain about.

[Bob33]

Any changes made mid-stream to an already screwed-up, convoluted permit draw system will do nothing but possibly appease a very small number of individuals while at the same time aggravating the vast majority of other applicants. That will drive more hunters away.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If it is broke, don’t screw it up even worse with some cockamamie scheme.

[huntnphool]

Any changes made mid-stream to an already screwed-up, convoluted permit draw system will do nothing but possibly appease a very small number of individuals while at the same time aggravating the vast majority of other applicants. That will drive more hunters away.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If it is broke, don’t screw it up even worse with some cockamamie scheme.

 Bingo!

[huntnphool]

 Idahohunter, was there any talk about reducing the number of quality deer tags in the Methow?

 

[bobcat]

Any changes made mid-stream to an already screwed-up, convoluted permit draw system will do nothing but possibly appease a very small number of individuals while at the same time aggravating the vast majority of other applicants. That will drive more hunters away.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If it is broke, don’t screw it up even worse with some cockamamie scheme.

 Bingo!

Agree 100%!

[npaull]

kind of look at the future of steelhead fishing as an example--the lawsuit that stopped hatchery plants in PS region

Not to thread hijack, but you're confused about this - the lawsuit against hatchery steelhead was driven largely by people who want MORE steelhead - people like my brother, who is a steelhead fishing guide! The data is very clear that the hatcheries are hurting wild steelhead and driving down numbers, not helping them.

[idahohuntr]

No discussion on returning tags or tag reductions for the methow.

On the tag return, are you asking about if you draw something like a cow tag and a quality bull tag you would like to return the cow tag and have your points restored?  If so, it seems like that was mentioned but for draw odds reasons didn't get much support?

Methow deer, recent fires, extra doe tags etc., makes me think Methow deer status would be a good agenda item for the spring meeting.

[BULLBLASTER]

I would be 100% against letting people return permits and having their points restored. Glad its not getting much attention.

[Little Dave]

Seems as though wdfw is in a short term game of pacifying hunters with focus on their form of harvest, as in our monies........they want our money and dont want to fix things or right wrongs to earn it..........

They're probably too uncertain (pessimistic maybe?) about the long term.  Predators and greenies, kind of look at the future of steelhead fishing as an example--the lawsuit that stopped hatchery plants in PS region.

Not to thread hijack, but you're confused about this - the lawsuit against hatchery steelhead was driven largely by people who want MORE steelhead - people like my brother, who is a steelhead fishing guide! The data is very clear that the hatcheries are hurting wild steelhead and driving down numbers, not helping them.

The matter of hatcheries hurting wild steelhead is debatable.  At a very minimum, hatcheries produce fish that generate revenue to support wild fish recovery expenses.  Toxic Puget Sound, lost habitat, and offshore fishing operations kill fish.  The idea that hatcheries can be removed without cleaning up Puget Sound, improving habitat, and negotiating harvest with the tribes, Canada, Japan, and Alaska is an unbelievable fairy tale.  The dams and the DFW see a way to cut costs and will cherry pick studies to use as "best science" to support budget goals.  Guides can be misguided.

[JimmyHoffa]

My example was more for how WDFW can't really rely on anything long term with this state's processes.  Similar to bans from initiatives.  I would guess that WDFW has in their long term plans to manage wolves, but do you think it will happen when they want?  If at all?  I would guess they are in for some major, long legal battles on that front.

[CarbonHunter]

No discussion on returning tags or tag reductions for the methow.

On the tag return, are you asking about if you draw something like a cow tag and a quality bull tag you would like to return the cow tag and have your points restored?  If so, it seems like that was mentioned but for draw odds reasons didn't get much support?

Methow deer, recent fires, extra doe tags etc., makes me think Methow deer status would be a good agenda item for the spring meeting.

Yep that's what I was talking about.

What did you mean by "for draw odds didn't get much support."

Does that mean they don't think it would increase odds of drawing or do they think that restoring someone's points and giving the tag to someone else would hurt other peoples chances of drawing in the future?

[idahohuntr]

That it would decrease everyone's draw odds.  No risk in applying for multiple categories anymore.