Draft Regs for Multi Season Permits

[huntnnw]

Its a fall back option for me..if I dont draw special unit tags or outta state hunts I will then pick one up

[buckfvr]

I believe they are getting the results they want.....selling many applications,  but less actual  permits.  Trying to over think their methods without knowing their purpose........We have to remember, WDFW past and current management practices makes it impossible to trust them.   

[muzbuster]

WDFW.... It's all about the money plain & simple.

[billythekidrock]

The data indicates that multi-season permit holders have higher harvest rates overall.  Your mileage may vary.

And according to WDFW it is the type of hunter purchasing the multi that makes the difference.

[400out]

WDFW would like you to think this change is for you and me but the proof is in the pudding IT'S NOT! It all comes down to money and the end result will be bad! I personally think this is as good for the herds as the second deer tag! If they wanted it to be a benefit to the hunter they could adjust the season in certain areas to give just a touch better hunting! get rid of the second deer tag and bring back the doe tags 

[Rainier10]

If there were 4000 multiseason deer permits last year and less than 2000 people bought them, why don't they just make them an over the counter first come first serve?  Once the 4000 or 8000 are gone they are gone.  It sounds like they wouldn't sell them all.  Maybe they like the draw thing because they get 6000 people putting in for the 4000 permits at $6 a pop and then not everyone buys them but they at least get $6 from 6000 people.

If it is all about money they should want to sell them all and an over the counter thing would ensure they sold more I would think.

[Eli346]

Bobcat,
 I see your point about season length and harvest rates or percentages and I agree in a sense. I think that a lot of the people that put in for the multi-season just love to be out in the woods like I do. If that buck of a lifetime happens to come along then I have the option of tagging it if possible. I'm out there scouting and setting up trail cams anyway so I may as well take advantage of it.
 I've drawn the deer 3 times and the elk only once and during those times I've taken only one deer during those tags. I find myself being so selective that I end up eating tag soup without any regrets. What I like about it is that you get the adrenalin flow going any time you're out in the woods but it increases when you're actually hunting.
 I think that with the cost staying high it will keep most of the less dedicated 'hunters' out of the mix leaving only the hardcore guys out there actually chasing them around. I've been out there for the duration for decades now and the pressure is getting more intense but I really do believe that the multi-season is only a very small part of that. Hunting seems to be getting more popular although I'm not sure if tag and license sales indicate that. I know that as access decreases, pressure increases and it will only get worse in the years to come. Rifle season for elk or deer is a zoo anymore so my being able to get out during the bow and muzzle loading season with a tag is a bonus I'm willing to spend the extra money on. I hope they keep the price of the tags high to filter out the 'wannabes'.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Sort of takes the State's argument away that dividing us up by weapon takes pressure off the deer and elk. I guess pressure is OK as long as the State gets their money.  What this will eventually do is shorten the season for everybody who doesn't draw one of these tags as it's been shown that any season hunters have a higher success rate than one season hunters. The more successful they are, the less animals left for the regular season.

[bobcat]

I've been thinking about this more and I'm beginning to think that the multi-season tags may not actually increase harvest. At least with the deer tag. Sure the statistics show a higher success rate for the multi-season tag, but as others have already said, couldn't it be that those who are willing to spend an extra $180 on tag, are hunters who probably would have a higher than average success rate anyway? It could even be that the multi-season tag holders may have a lower success rate than they would have otherwise. The reason for this is that how many are going to shoot the first spike or little 2 point buck they see, when they paid an extra $180 for the tag? I know I wouldn't. Again, I'm thinking of only deer. With elk I think more people are likely to take the first legal elk they see so I could definitely see harvest increasing with the elk multi-season tag. But deer I'm not so sure.

[Wenatcheejay]

Sort of takes the State's argument away that dividing us up by weapon takes pressure off the deer and elk. I guess pressure is OK as long as the State gets their money.  What this will eventually do is shorten the season for everybody who doesn't draw one of these tags as it's been shown that any season hunters have a higher success rate than one season hunters. The more successful they are, the less animals left for the regular season.

People complain that the seasons are to crowded. People complain the do not want to loose the general over the counter tag season. People complain they have to choose a weapon. People complain they don't have an option to hunt more than one season. People complain that there is an expensive option to hunt all general seasons but still harvest one animal.

There was a total harvest of 33,778 deer harvested in 2009. There were 136,859 thousand deer hunters.

2000 multi-season tag permits were sold. Half harvested a deer. If you were to take those people and replace them with standard general season statisitcs then you would half the half to 500 deer. That would change the harvest by .0148%. It's a voluntary system, don't like it don't buy it.

They offer 2 pole multi season and other incentive voluntary participation and we complain. They raise general prices and we complain. The lower tags and we complain. They raise the number of tags and options and we complain. 

Maybe ignoring us makes sense.

[bobcat]

Maybe ignoring us makes sense.

Well said!   

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Not complaining. Just trying to see where this is going. As they need more money are they going to keep upping the quota of any season tags? What next 16,000 any season deer tags? Then 32,000? They seem to like doubling what the current rate is. 

Heck, if they need the money that bad, why not just do away with the games and have an over the counter any season tag that anyone can buy? Just leave it up to the hunter if they want to pay the money so they can have a longer season. Some will, some won't.

[wsmnut]

Some time soon they will find out just what the "market" will bear.
Once they figure out what folks will pay, then we might see a change we really don't like.
In other words there maybe more to this than just short term cash flow.

Wsmnut

[Wenatcheejay]

Not complaining. Just trying to see where this is going. As they need more money are they going to keep upping the quota of any season tags? What next 16,000 any season deer tags? Then 32,000? They seem to like doubling what the current rate is. 

Heck, if they need the money that bad, why not just do away with the games and have an over the counter any season tag that anyone can buy? Just leave it up to the hunter if they want to pay the money so they can have a longer season. Some will, some won't.

Well, Idaho has a program like you are talking about. Until wolves they were able to handle it. I don't want to see harvest double or triple. That would lead to a closing of a general season and it would go permit. But even if the number of sold multi season doubled and all other factors stayed the same that would be a harvest increase of .03%. I hardly think that is a sky is falling situation. If it is then how can you be such a strong advocate for wolves? Not a highjack here, an example. It is a choice, don't like it don't participate. If it violates your ethics don't participate. If others do participate it is a difference of .0148% to a potential of .03% in the total harvest. Not a big deal. We have bigger issues to deal with IMO. Also, pretty much for deer if you put in you will probably draw so what you say exists.