Writing Letters to the WDFW and/or Commission Regarding Permit Proposal

[bobcat]

I just thought it would be interesting to get a count as to how many people are sending letters. You can only vote once, but you can go back and change your vote, so after you send your letter or email, come back and change your vote to "I have already done so..."

[Curly]

My letter to the commission asked them to vote against the proposal until the vendor (Outdoor Central) can figure out how to design the software with a way for us to check a box telling them what category we want our accumulated points to be placed (instead of placing the points in all categories).  I'm certain that this could have been accomplished by now if they would have tried to do it since apparently they've been working on this concept since 2008.

[Bob33]

My letter to the commission asked them to vote against the proposal until the vendor (Outdoor Central) can figure out how to design the software with a way for us to check a box telling them what category we want our accumulated points to be placed (instead of placing the points in all categories).

That means we won't see this until 2015.  Good job!

[Curly]

 

I don't have much hope that they will even listen.  But at least I've let them know how I feel.  

OC as a vendor is another topic altogether.........I don't like the idea of using out of state vendors.......seems like someone in this state could have done this and kept the money in state.....   (At least OC is not in China or India.......)

[Bob33]

I don't have much hope that they will even listen.  But at least I've let them know how I feel. 

Actually I have good reason to believe they are hearing from a significant number of constituents.  Don't give up hope.

[winston2789]

Would it really be that hard for them to add a box to check for which category you want your points to go for? 

[Curly]

Would it really be that hard for them to add a box to check for which category you want your points to go for? 

I don't think so, but I asked that exact question to WDFW and they said it would be too complex......

[winston2789]

We haven't got many letters sent by the looks of the poll.......

[Elkaholic daWg]

We haven't got many letters sent by the looks of the poll.......

I'm very sure that they got at least 6 letters that are not in the poll from emails to my contact list.

[winston2789]

Right on Elkaholic Dawg   

[bbarnes]

My question to the commission was,when will archery hunters have to buy cow tags like the other groups.If they want revenue this is one thing to look at also doe tags.Seems to me the rifle hunters are paying the bills, for all the other user groups and get allot less time out there.

[Bob33]

Has anyone wondered what happens to the (un)lucky applicant who draws two tags?

Dave Ware has answered that question: "we planned to stick with our current SOP which says you must have a specific reason to return a permit and get points reinstated: application error, illness, deployment, etc."

Here are my questions to this plan:
1.  How does WDFW plan to increase revenues by selling more applications, if applicants will be penalized for drawing two tags?
2. What happens if an applicant draws two tags and does not return one?  How will WDFW know? Will they contact the applicant?  How would an enforcement officer know that a person is hunting with a second tag?
3.  If the tag is returned for a hunt that has a very low quota or is a premiere hunt (Desert A deer, for example), what happens to the unused tag?  Will the department implement alternates for deer and elk like they do for the OIL tags?  Will there be a second draw?
4.  What provisions have been made with Outdoor Central to acccommodate return of tags?  What testing has been done?

[provider]

You do not have to return additional permits.  If you draw 5 different categories in one specie, you could hunt all of them.

We're not drawing "tags"...  we're drawing permits to utilize the one tag in your pocket.  Of course, unless it's a "2nd tag"...  but you get the idea. 

[bobcat]

Bob, I'm a little confused by your post. First, you are using the term "tag" when you are really talking about a "permit." In the new proposal they have a slight change in wording to the rule which allows the return of a permit. This is it:

If an applicant makes a mistake, applies for the wrong hunt,
and is successfully drawn, the special hunting season permit can be
returned to the department of fish and wildlife Olympia headquarters
before the opening day of the special hunting season ((or the opening
day of the general hunting season, whichever comes first)). The
applicant's points will be restored to the level prior to the permit
drawing.

So basically if you draw more than one permit for a species and you only want to use one of them, you can lie and say you made a mistake in applying for that permit, and have your points restored.

But being that they are not "tags," you are free to use as many permits as you draw. Of course you still only have the one tag to use so once you harvest an animal you are done.

[Bob33]

So if you draw an antlered and an antlerless permit, you can hunt for both, but only harvest one?

[Curly]

So if you draw an antlered and an antlerless permit, you can hunt for both, but only harvest one?

Yep. 

[bobcat]

So if you draw an antlered and an antlerless permit, you can hunt for both, but only harvest one?

Dumb, isn't it? If they're going to let people put in for multiple categories for the same species, the drawing should be set up in a way so that if a person draws one permit they're automatically disqualified for any more permits for that same species.

I know what the WDFW would say to that... it's too complicated. Just like it would be too complicated to allow people to CHOOSE which category they want their points to go into, rather than putting points into ALL categories.

I can't count the number of things that are wrong with this proposal.

[bobcat]

I see there are 3 people who voted in the poll and support the proposal. It would be nice to hear from you people and if you could please let us know WHY you support it?

[rackattack]

I actually hope these proposals go through.  I don't think it will be as bad as people are making it out to be.   My hunting seasons do not revolve around drawing a special permits.  I have never drawn one, but I also realize that this is what comes with putting in for high demand hunts.  I'm looking forward to the 2 choice system for quality hunts, because this will increase my odds.  Will I put in for cow/doe hunts, probably not, I just have no desire to kill a cow/doe.  The odds of drawing one permit are hard enough, let alone two, so people getting multiple permits is not that big of a deal.  Yeah, there will be a few, but the odds are just not that great and good for them if they do.  I think what really getting most people worked up is the issue with points being transferred across the board.  Nobody knows how many large point holders are out there and how they hunt.  I'm sure there are many like me that have no desire for these additional antlerless tags.  Even if all the high point guys bought into this new system, they might skew the odds for one/two years at most then they will be out.  Odds are you probably wouldn't have hit that antlerless tag anyways during those years.  It's a random draw.  Once again these are my  .     

[Bob33]

I'm looking forward to the 2 choice system for quality hunts, because this will increase my odds.

Can you please explain why you believe that?

[Elkaholic daWg]

I'm looking forward to the 2 choice system for quality hunts, because this will increase my odds.

Can you please explain why you believe that?

 I would like to hear that answer too. I have 14 points Squared =196  Now lets throw in 1500 meat( Cow)hunters with 2 points squared= 6000...... now which number has the better chance of the ball falling into?

[rackattack]

I'm looking forward to the 2 choice system for quality hunts, because this will increase my odds.

Can you please explain why you believe that?

Let's look at what I typically put if for, and they all fall as quality hunts under this proposal.  Usually, I list Nooksack, Margaret, Mudflow, Toutle as my four choice.  These are perhaps the four most sought after tags on the westside, but you can substitute eastside hunt if that's what you apply for.  With the new proposal if everyone has to pick 2 hunts instead of 4, then 2 hunts get left out.  Same number of people applying, but their names are now gone from two of these hunts.  Now if I had to guess, most people will still put Margaret down as a choice, just because that's what everyone usually does.  If I put Nooksack and Toutle down as my choices my odds just increased on one of those hunts because everyone else has Margaret listed as one of their hunts.  The biggest question will be how people choose their hunts.  I think the rifle guys will see the greatest increase in odds, just because of more choices with all the rut tags. 

[bobcat]

I could actually see odds being slightly better for some of the "quality" hunts with the reduction in the number of choices allowed. Other hunts I see the odds getting worse. It all depends on how people's selections change.

Elkaholic, The scenario you posted above I am not sure is quite correct. Where do the additional "meat hunters" come from? I understand your thinking, but I have been predominantly applying for cow permits the last few years, but I will always throw in a good bull hunt as a first and maybe a second choice, ahead of my cow permits. So I'm just not sure if the "quality" permits will get that many more applicants. They probably will though, just due to the fact that they are now calling them "quality" permits. That should be enough to inspire many to apply for them who had not before.

[Bob33]

Here is the problem I see with believing that reducing quality hunt applications to two choices will improve odds.  

Today, most of the quality permits are drawn as a first or second choice.  Take 2009. Desert A Deer is one of the hardest tags to draw.  There are 4972 applicant choices for 15 permits.  Of the 15 that drew, 13 had it listed as their first choice, and 2 had it listed as their second choice. None had it listed as a 3rd or 4th choice.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/results/deer.html
Elk in 2009.  Dayton A offered 21 permits and their were 1677 applicant choices.  Of the 21 that drew, 19 had it listed as a first or second choice.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/results/elk.html

The typical applicant applies for the hunts he wants the most as his first or second choice.

With a change to two choices only for quality hunts, the vast majority of individuals that have been applying for these hunts will continue to apply.  You may lose a few that applied for the quality hunts as a third or fourth choice, but probably less than ten percent at most.  In addition, the quality draw pools will now also have individuals that previously applied only for antlerless hunts.  They may only have five points or less, but they will dilute the odds of the quality pool.

That's the way I predict it will go: harder, not easier odds for the quality tags.

[Bob33]

"Many hunters fear the worst if proposed tag system takes off"
http://sportsyakima.com/2010/03/many-hunters-fear-the-worst-if-proposed-tag-system-takes-off/

This article was written because of information provided in this post that was forwarded to the Yakima Herald. 

Keep the heat up!

[Elkaholic daWg]

  Saw the date he had listed for the meeting and had to recheck that......That would have cost me the ability to attend

[bobcat]

Good catch. I didn't even notice that until you posted and I went back and read it again. Would have been nice if he got the dates right and also if he could have said WHERE the meeting was, and that it is open to the public.

[Bob33]

[ "Rob Phillips is a freelance outdoor writer and partner in the advertising firm of Smith, Phillips & DiPietro. He can be reached at rwphillips@spdadvertising.com" ]

(I emailed Rob the following.)

Rob, thank you for publishing the article in the Yakima Herald about the proposed changes to elk and deer permitting in Washington state.

Incorrect dates are listed for the Commission meeting.  The meeting will be held in Leavenworth on April 9 and 10, not April 3 and 4 as noted in the article.  The meeting is open to the public.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/do/newreal/release.php?id=mar1510b

Also, please encourage readers to contact the Commission before the meeting in order to express their opinion about the proposed changes.  This is a major change that will have significant impacts on big game hunting in Washington for many years.  Many are concerned that the impacts will be adverse and not positive.

The Commission may be emailed at commission@dfw.wa.gov

Letters to the Commission should be addressed to:

Fish and Wildlife Commission
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98501-1091

Thank you.