Wdfw Proposal for reduced youth antlerless moose tags

[buglebrush]

They really can't change how the point system works now that it's already been in place several years. It was extremely unfair when they did it the first time. I agree all the extra categories were not necessary but now that we have them I think they should just keep it the way it is.

 They can change it, they won't because it generates revenue.

 It's crazy how bad the draw odds are in this state.  IMO Either choose one species only of Sheep, Goat, Moose or only two out of Deer, Elk, Bear.  Draw odds would go through the roof; and as for it being unfair to people with points it would be just the opposite!    Those with stockpiled points in many categories would be way ahead of  the game!  Sure you'd have to prioritize, but your odds of drawing everything would be so much better even if it would necessarily string it out over ten years.   

[bobcat]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

[bobcat]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

It would be fine if it weren't for the point system, but if I was still applying for moose and sheep I wouldn't think it would be fair to all of a sudden say I had to pick only one. If there were no points, then yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal. Everything would be so much easier if we didn't have a point system. But no worries, it will never be an option anyway as it would decrease revenue to the WDFW.

[Pegasus]

Let's face it. Many tags for the kids end up being Dad's tag anyways. Same thing for many spouses that don't hunt but they put in for various tags. This year while permit elk hunting I hate to say almost every vehicle I passed had three or four hunters with rifles with only one having a tag. I am sure they were all just bear hunting.  :chuckle:This was before the general season opened. Any bull seen was immediately shot at by all of the occupants of the vehicles. Unfortunately this is the reality of the permit drawing and even extends into the general seasons.

[Miles]

Let's face it. Many tags for the kids end up being Dad's tag anyways. Same thing for many spouses that don't hunt but they put in for various tags. This year while permit elk hunting I hate to say almost every vehicle I passed had three or four hunters with rifles with only one having a tag. I am sure they were all just bear hunting.  :chuckle:This was before the general season opened. Any bull seen was immediately shot at by all of the occupants of the vehicles. Unfortunately this is the reality of the permit drawing and even extends into the general seasons.

Wow.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

It would be fine if it weren't for the point system, but if I was still applying for moose and sheep I wouldn't think it would be fair to all of a sudden say I had to pick only one. If there were no points, then yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal. Everything would be so much easier if we didn't have a point system. But no worries, it will never be an option anyway as it would decrease revenue to the WDFW.

But everyone would have to make the same choice so there is no unfairness that I can see. No one gets an advantage other than everyone gets better draw odds.

[bobcat]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

It would be fine if it weren't for the point system, but if I was still applying for moose and sheep I wouldn't think it would be fair to all of a sudden say I had to pick only one. If there were no points, then yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal. Everything would be so much easier if we didn't have a point system. But no worries, it will never be an option anyway as it would decrease revenue to the WDFW.

But everyone would have to make the same choice so there is no unfairness that I can see. No one gets an advantage other than everyone gets better draw odds.

Not really better odds though. If you put in for all three, you have a chance of drawing any of the the three. Restrict it to only one, and then you're down to only one chance to draw. Sure there might be less applicants for each one, but at best I think your odds would stay the same.

[buglebrush]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

It would be fine if it weren't for the point system, but if I was still applying for moose and sheep I wouldn't think it would be fair to all of a sudden say I had to pick only one. If there were no points, then yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal. Everything would be so much easier if we didn't have a point system. But no worries, it will never be an option anyway as it would decrease revenue to the WDFW.

But everyone would have to make the same choice so there is no unfairness that I can see. No one gets an advantage other than everyone gets better draw odds.

Not really better odds though. If you put in for all three, you have a chance of drawing any of the the three. Restrict it to only one, and then you're down to only one chance to draw. Sure there might be less applicants for each one, but at best I think your odds would stay the same.

you're wrong.  Way better odds, because of the huge reduction in numbers of people applying for your chosen tag.  Plus if you're someone who already has points in multiple category's you're way ahead of the game as others will now only collect a point for one species each year.  It's clearly a win, win.

[bobcat]

I'd be fine with only applying for moose, since I already drew sheep, and have never applied for mountain goat, but it wouldn't be fair to others who haven't drawn any of the three.

You don't think trading three draws at 1,000 to one for one draw at 333 to one would be fair? And if they drew for whatever they applied for, they could switch to a different species in the future.

It would be fine if it weren't for the point system, but if I was still applying for moose and sheep I wouldn't think it would be fair to all of a sudden say I had to pick only one. If there were no points, then yeah, it wouldn't be a big deal. Everything would be so much easier if we didn't have a point system. But no worries, it will never be an option anyway as it would decrease revenue to the WDFW.

But everyone would have to make the same choice so there is no unfairness that I can see. No one gets an advantage other than everyone gets better draw odds.

Not really better odds though. If you put in for all three, you have a chance of drawing any of the the three. Restrict it to only one, and then you're down to only one chance to draw. Sure there might be less applicants for each one, but at best I think your odds would stay the same.

you're wrong.  Way better odds, because of the huge reduction in numbers of people applying for your chosen tag.  Plus if you're someone who already has points in multiple category's you're way ahead of the game as others will now only collect a point for one species each year.  It's clearly a win, win.

You don't get it. Sure, better odds for one species. But you're only in for one, instead of three. That reduces your odds of being drawn for one of the three. Let's just say you don't have a preference, you just would like to draw any of the three. Having a chance in three different draws is better than having a chance at only one draw.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

That's the thought process that gets people to buy every lotto ticket at the grocery store. lol  Can't win if you don't have a ticket!

[Falcon]

There were 18 youth moose permits last year for 1800 applicants which means 99% of the applicants didn’t draw. I don’t buy the argument that eliminating the 18 youth moose permits will have a significant impact on youth hunting. There are hundreds of youth deer permits, and most are relatively easy to draw. The last few years the Seattle Puget Sound chapter of Safari Club has sponsored a free youth deer hunt for ten youth hunters, and the number of applicants is usually less than 30. Why is that?

Take a youth upland bird hunting or waterfowl hunting where they’ll shoot more than once. Teach them that hunting is much more than simply harvesting an animal. I started elk hunting with my dad when I was 12, and didn’t shoot an elk for more than 15 years of hunting with him but I have nothing but fond memories of those

And there isn’t an “Adult Moose permit” category; anyone with a hunting license can apply including a youth.

I’ll a big advocate of youth hunters, but this isn’t the issue to make much progress with.
[/quote]

  I couldn’t agree more.  Spot on