Post by: Dbax129 on April 29, 2013, 09:24:51 PM
Hunt Number Hunt Name Hunt Area Total
Applicants Permits
Issued Reports
Returned Hunters Hunter
Success
1352 VASHON-MAURY DEER AREA 4013 58 51 36 17 58.8%
Anterless
Harvest Antlered
Harvest Total
Harvest 1 Point 2 Point 3 Point 4 Point 5+ Point
10 0 10 0 0 0 0
Basically, that table didn't copy over very well, but the ide is this:
58 total applicants
51 permits were issued
36 reports were returned
17 hunters
17 hunters?!?!?! I am so confused. They say that only 17 hunters were issued 36 second deer permits? I don't get it. 51 permits were issued actually, so to only 17 people? Please help me understand this. are people getting more than one, so like a 3rd deer tag? because there are extra permits or something?
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 10:00:51 PM
Post by: bobcat on April 29, 2013, 10:19:40 PM
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 10:24:41 PM
Basically I agree with Jackelope. The part that I do question is how they determine how many hunted when they have incomplete data. They are lacking 15 reports. Do they have some mathematical formula to take that into account?
I think they just report what they get. The other 15 may or may not have hunted, but either way they didn't fill out their reports. That's 15 guys that have to pay the penalty for not filling out their hunter harvest report, right?
Post by: rtspring on April 29, 2013, 10:24:59 PM
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2013, 10:28:22 PM
Post by: bobcat on April 29, 2013, 10:37:30 PM
Basically I agree with Jackelope. The part that I do question is how they determine how many hunted when they have incomplete data. They are lacking 15 reports. Do they have some mathematical formula to take that into account?
I think they just report what they get. The other 15 may or may not have hunted, but either way they didn't fill out their reports. That's 15 guys that have to pay the penalty for not filling out their hunter harvest report, right?
That's what is not clear to me. Out of the 15 missing reports, chances are that some of those hunters DID hunt. So are they all just counted as not hunting? Or do they have a factor they use to estimate how many hunted but did not turn in a report?
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 10:47:19 PM
Basically I agree with Jackelope. The part that I do question is how they determine how many hunted when they have incomplete data. They are lacking 15 reports. Do they have some mathematical formula to take that into account?
I think they just report what they get. The other 15 may or may not have hunted, but either way they didn't fill out their reports. That's 15 guys that have to pay the penalty for not filling out their hunter harvest report, right?
That's what is not clear to me. Out of the 15 missing reports, chances are that some of those hunters DID hunt. So are they all just counted as not hunting? Or do they have a factor they use to estimate how many hunted but did not turn in a report?
Sure some of them hunted. They are counted(or not counted really) as the ones that did not report. I don't see a category for "Did not hunt". There's applicants, permits, reports and hunted. There doesn't appear to be any estimates or anything factored to me. What's not reported is not taken into consideration. It's thrown out the window. It's not perfect world type stuff. It is what it is.
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2013, 11:01:54 PM
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 11:06:10 PM
Post by: bobcat on April 29, 2013, 11:11:18 PM
Post by: Dbax129 on April 29, 2013, 11:13:08 PM
One other question, why is it that only 51 of people were awarded permits when 58 people applied? This hunt choice offers 100 permits, so why did 7 of those 58 not get awarded a permit? Could this have been their 2nd choice and they drew their 1st choice?
Post by: jackelope on April 29, 2013, 11:13:18 PM
So if that's the case, the deer and elk harvest is very likely much higher than what the harvest report indicates. Correct?
I'd say it's not an exact science.
Post by: bobcat on April 29, 2013, 11:15:08 PM
Thanks to Jackelope and Bob33. That clears it up for me completely.
One other question, why is it that only 51 of people were awarded permits when 58 people applied? This hunt choice offers 100 permits, so why did 7 of those 58 not get awarded a permit? Could this have been their 2nd choice and they drew their 1st choice?
My guess is that the 7 just chose to not buy the tag. It's nearly $70.
Post by: Dbax129 on April 29, 2013, 11:18:35 PM
So if that's the case, the deer and elk harvest is very likely much higher than what the harvest report indicates. Correct?
i'm probably way less experienced at figuring this stuff out, but from what I would assume (and I think that is all one can do here) is that the 15 people that didn't return a report are probably mostly people who did not hunt. Maybe of the people who reported and those that did not, there were the same ratio of hunters to non hunters, but I would assume that someone who didn't even go on the hunt is more likely to forget to report or fail to report. Someone who was successfull would probably be more likely to report. I would be more likely to count the "failed to report" folks as mostly UNsuccessfull, therefore making the success rate lower than what is reported, not higher.
This is basically just from personal experience, as this year I tried to report one day late and wasn't allowed to. I procrastinated because I felt it wasn't very important since I did not harvest. (I know this was the wrong mentality and do not condone this idea). But that is what happened. :twocents:
Post by: Dbax129 on April 29, 2013, 11:20:44 PM
Thanks to Jackelope and Bob33. That clears it up for me completely.
One other question, why is it that only 51 of people were awarded permits when 58 people applied? This hunt choice offers 100 permits, so why did 7 of those 58 not get awarded a permit? Could this have been their 2nd choice and they drew their 1st choice?
My guess is that the 7 just chose to not buy the tag. It's nearly $70.
OOO, that makes total sense. For a minute I was thinking about other types of special permits, like not in the 2nd deer category. Those don't cost extra right? They just provide a different opportunity within your general tag?
I could definitely see people not buying the extra tag for whatever reason since its more than their first.
Post by: bobcat on April 29, 2013, 11:21:10 PM
Quote
i'm probably way less experienced at figuring this stuff out, but from what I would assume (and I think that is all one can do here) is that the 15 people that didn't return a report are probably mostly people who did not hunt.
Or they're just the people who happen to have the money to pay an extra $10 when they buy their hunting license the following year. :dunno:
Post by: Dbax129 on April 29, 2013, 11:25:18 PM