Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on October 29, 2015, 10:04:39 AM
https://idfg.idaho.gov/webform/open-survey-controlled-hunt-drawings-and-auction-tags
Post by: MerriamMagician on October 29, 2015, 11:22:19 AM
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on October 29, 2015, 11:30:07 AM
Post by: X-Force on October 29, 2015, 11:40:19 AM
Going to a 1 species system would allow people to really focus on a particular animal but they would necessarily increase application fees.
Post by: pd on October 29, 2015, 11:44:33 AM
I participated in the survey. Thanks for the notice.
Post by: elkinrutdrivemenuts on October 29, 2015, 12:16:20 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on October 29, 2015, 01:04:25 PM
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Post by: grundy53 on October 29, 2015, 01:29:50 PM
Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on October 29, 2015, 03:32:04 PM
Post by: 2MANY on October 29, 2015, 03:47:44 PM
Post by: bearpaw on October 29, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on October 29, 2015, 05:32:02 PM
Idaho has the best system, no changes PLEASE!
While I agree with you I see the "everybody gets a trophy, it's not fair that I never draw" crowd slowly winning out with IDFG. Hence my suggestion which would guarantee another 10 years of full random draw and keep it mostly as is after that point
Post by: idahohuntr on October 29, 2015, 06:34:40 PM
I dont see them winning. They lose every time...and as more sportsmen see the effects of point creep and the scam of point systems I think support will continue to dwindle. New commissioners doing their diligence is all...happens every so often with a high number of new commissioners...there is a squeaky minority no doubt.Idaho has the best system, no changes PLEASE!
While I agree with you I see the "everybody gets a trophy, it's not fair that I never draw" crowd slowly winning out with IDFG. Hence my suggestion which would guarantee another 10 years of full random draw and keep it mostly as is after that point
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Post by: Bigshooter on October 29, 2015, 07:28:43 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on October 29, 2015, 07:40:41 PM
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Post by: Bigshooter on October 29, 2015, 08:13:22 PM
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 30, 2015, 07:48:36 AM
Post by: Mr Mykiss on October 30, 2015, 11:03:55 AM
So while we're on this topic, what if Idaho kept the exact same draw system they have right now, except they add a bonus or preference point system for each species. Oppose or support?So what you're saying is that if Idaho kept the exact same system but totally changed it...it would still be the exact same system?
Post by: Mr Mykiss on October 30, 2015, 11:20:14 AM
It does seem that IDFG is susceptible to the almighty dollar but there seems to be an overwhelming majority on this one, in favor of no changes.
However the "Bad Break 10" system as described by Andrew: I would like to see them do a system whereby you accrue points every year you apply and don't draw up to 10 years at which point there will be a cap and a pool of 25% of tags set aside for all holders of 10 points. The remaining 75% of tags remain the same, total random draw no points, it would give a slight advantage to those who are just unlucky while not taking a lot away from new hunters
However if you looked at the statistics of that scenario you might find that the odds wouldn't actually change much/at all since it's likely that there would be a considerable pool. Say the Bad Break 10's get to be in the random and Bad Luck draw they might have a 5% chance in the random draw and a 2% chance in the Bad Luck draw, much less because there's only a 1/4 of the tags in that pool. So yes they'd get a few percent better chance but is it really worth revamping the whole system?
Post by: MtnMuley on October 30, 2015, 11:44:42 AM
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 30, 2015, 12:03:45 PM
Idaho is just fine the way it is. Why go *#$^ it up?
Plenty of states where the trophy hunters can go and pay for there points and play with all the HUNTINFOOL folks and there magazine... The best thing that could happen is if all states eliminated there money grubbing points systems.
Post by: theleo on October 30, 2015, 12:45:39 PM
Post by: Mr Mykiss on October 30, 2015, 01:09:07 PM
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on October 30, 2015, 01:12:24 PM
Post by: X-Force on October 30, 2015, 01:36:52 PM
I like raffles and random draws. I do not like auctions and point systems.
I know a lot of guys dont like auction hunts but for revenue generation they are great... lets face it fish and game department, specific wildlife etc need revenue to buy, build, protect habitat. Auction tags are very limited 10-12 per state really what is that in the grand scheme of things when they generate big cash.
Last year auction tags generated a quarter of a million dollars for WDFW if they wanted to make that kind of money without auctions it would require a $2 increase in license fees and everyone would be up in arms about the rate hike.
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on October 30, 2015, 02:01:37 PM
I understand the justification, I vehemently do not agree with it. I would far rather see the cost of the special permit application or tag increase. Auctioning opportunities to hunt the public's wildlife is 1000% contrary to the North American model of public ownership of wildlife, and to my radical way of thinking is even illegal under the equal protections clause of the Constitution's 14th Amendment.I like raffles and random draws. I do not like auctions and point systems.
I know a lot of guys dont like auction hunts but for revenue generation they are great... lets face it fish and game department, specific wildlife etc need revenue to buy, build, protect habitat. Auction tags are very limited 10-12 per state really what is that in the grand scheme of things when they generate big cash.
Last year auction tags generated a quarter of a million dollars for WDFW if they wanted to make that kind of money without auctions it would require a $2 increase in license fees and everyone would be up in arms about the rate hike.
It is no different, in my mind, than a trustee stealing from a trust fund or justifying theft as necessary to feed one's family. Is a $0.25 million additional revenue to an agency with an annual budget of $200 million a good justification for whoring out the resource (one 8th of one percent)? How about auction tags for fishing endangered runs that are otherwise closed to the general public? Auction tags for spring waterfowl hunting when the breeding plumage is nicest? How about a $100,000 get out of jail free card that lets you break laws as much as you can until you get caught, then nullifies the charges? No? How about a $10,000,000 get out of jail free card, to fully fund education in the state? A limited number of licenses to legally deal methamphetamine, to fund illegal drug enforcement? Drunk driving permits to the highest bidder, to fund DUI emphasis? A handful of legal rape permits to fund processing of the thousands of unanalyzed rape kits? These are absurd, yet we auction off, to the highest bidder, the opportunity to poach the biggest and best of the public's wildlife?
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 30, 2015, 02:32:49 PM
I understand the justification, I vehemently do not agree with it. I would far rather see the cost of the special permit application or tag increase. Auctioning opportunities to hunt the public's wildlife is 1000% contrary to the North American model of public ownership of wildlife, and to my radical way of thinking is even illegal under the equal protections clause of the Constitution's 14th Amendment.I like raffles and random draws. I do not like auctions and point systems.
I know a lot of guys dont like auction hunts but for revenue generation they are great... lets face it fish and game department, specific wildlife etc need revenue to buy, build, protect habitat. Auction tags are very limited 10-12 per state really what is that in the grand scheme of things when they generate big cash.
Last year auction tags generated a quarter of a million dollars for WDFW if they wanted to make that kind of money without auctions it would require a $2 increase in license fees and everyone would be up in arms about the rate hike.
It is no different, in my mind, than a trustee stealing from a trust fund or justifying theft as necessary to feed one's family. Is a $0.25 million additional revenue to an agency with an annual budget of $200 million a good justification for whoring out the resource (one 8th of one percent)? How about auction tags for fishing endangered runs that are otherwise closed to the general public? Auction tags for spring waterfowl hunting when the breeding plumage is nicest? How about a $100,000 get out of jail free card that lets you break laws as much as you can until you get caught, then nullifies the charges? No? How about a $10,000,000 get out of jail free card, to fully fund education in the state? A limited number of licenses to legally deal methamphetamine, to fund illegal drug enforcement? Drunk driving permits to the highest bidder, to fund DUI emphasis? A handful of legal rape permits to fund processing of the thousands of unanalyzed rape kits? These are absurd, yet we auction off, to the highest bidder, the opportunity to poach the biggest and best of the public's wildlife?
Interesting way to look at it.
Post by: idahohuntr on October 30, 2015, 03:26:58 PM
I like your descriptions!! I would also argue on point systems, they are like welfare/entitlements that continue to pile up huge debt that future generations will have to pay for sooner or later...but yea, it's great if you get in on the base level! :chuckle:I understand the justification, I vehemently do not agree with it. I would far rather see the cost of the special permit application or tag increase. Auctioning opportunities to hunt the public's wildlife is 1000% contrary to the North American model of public ownership of wildlife, and to my radical way of thinking is even illegal under the equal protections clause of the Constitution's 14th Amendment.I like raffles and random draws. I do not like auctions and point systems.
I know a lot of guys dont like auction hunts but for revenue generation they are great... lets face it fish and game department, specific wildlife etc need revenue to buy, build, protect habitat. Auction tags are very limited 10-12 per state really what is that in the grand scheme of things when they generate big cash.
Last year auction tags generated a quarter of a million dollars for WDFW if they wanted to make that kind of money without auctions it would require a $2 increase in license fees and everyone would be up in arms about the rate hike.
It is no different, in my mind, than a trustee stealing from a trust fund or justifying theft as necessary to feed one's family. Is a $0.25 million additional revenue to an agency with an annual budget of $200 million a good justification for whoring out the resource (one 8th of one percent)? How about auction tags for fishing endangered runs that are otherwise closed to the general public? Auction tags for spring waterfowl hunting when the breeding plumage is nicest? How about a $100,000 get out of jail free card that lets you break laws as much as you can until you get caught, then nullifies the charges? No? How about a $10,000,000 get out of jail free card, to fully fund education in the state? A limited number of licenses to legally deal methamphetamine, to fund illegal drug enforcement? Drunk driving permits to the highest bidder, to fund DUI emphasis? A handful of legal rape permits to fund processing of the thousands of unanalyzed rape kits? These are absurd, yet we auction off, to the highest bidder, the opportunity to poach the biggest and best of the public's wildlife?
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk