Post by: huntnphool on March 08, 2008, 01:41:05 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 08, 2008, 01:46:21 PM
Post by: PolarBear on March 08, 2008, 01:46:38 PM
Post by: 280ackley on March 08, 2008, 01:58:05 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 08, 2008, 01:58:25 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 08, 2008, 02:12:11 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 08, 2008, 02:24:04 PM
Post by: M_ray on March 08, 2008, 03:34:47 PM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on March 08, 2008, 03:51:36 PM
Quote
I say with moose sheep and goat, its all about luck and points don't count for squat.
Yup
Even with max points and them some you still have less than .25% chance at any of the tags.
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 08, 2008, 03:59:56 PM
However, there are a bunch of die hards that really want to draw moose on here... I got to encourage you to apply for Idaho. The odds guarantee you a tag if you want in a great wilderness unit. A thousand or so for a drop camp and you can take an elk and moose in units like 10, 12, or 17. Last year I drew in a unit where 4 nonresidents applied for 1 nonresident tag... I'll take 25% anyday of the week. If you hit me up on PM I'll tell you what unit I hunted and if you draw I will tell you exactly where the moose are... :) (you got to pack it out though...)
Shawn
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 08, 2008, 05:22:07 PM
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on March 08, 2008, 06:20:10 PM
Post by: Wea300mag on March 08, 2008, 06:45:25 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 08, 2008, 07:45:16 PM
Post by: Bookworm on March 08, 2008, 07:52:44 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on March 08, 2008, 10:27:07 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 08, 2008, 11:34:23 PM
By the way, I found a 1995 hunting regulation booklet in my garage last week. It was ridiculous the odds and tags we were given for goats back then. Some of the odds were about 50% draw and there were so many more tags given back then. I have a hard time believing that there are tons less goats now. I wonder what spawned the management change. Some units were really rugged and didn't have high success. However, it did give people a chance to get out there and hunt goats. It's a shame we have gotten to where we currently are with special species.
Post by: bobcat on March 08, 2008, 11:42:34 PM
They can't go to only allowing people to put in for only one species because people already have points built up for all species and it wouldn't be fair to change the system now.
Post by: shanevg on March 08, 2008, 11:51:25 PM
Goat tags have been reduced because the goat populations have been dropping. The theory I heard from one biologist was that it was because of the increase in cougars. Apparently mountain goats are easy prey for cougars and one of their favorite species to target.
They can't go to only allowing people to put in for only one species because people already have points built up for all species and it wouldn't be fair to change the system now.
I'm still of the opinion that in general, a lot of the biologists just don't know how many goats there are, but a lot of the granolas want to limit the hunting, so the biologists go along. The Avalanche Gorge and Chowder Ridge units just opened up this year for the first time in 10+ years. My dad has had two or three tags in there and has shown me all his favorite hunting spots. After the units were closed we would go backpacking in there and see 60-150 goats in 2 days. And that was counting individual goats, not goat sightings. If we saw the same herd, we didn't double count. Anyways, we came down and told the Park Rangers about all the goats we saw and they pretty much scoffed at us and blew us off. One Ranger even said "I've been hiking up there all my life and I've never seen more than 10 goat in a trip." My dad talked to a couple of game biologists and they said, "The numbers have just been dwindling too much." Reading through the lines, my dad still believes they never actually had the money to put up a survey to see how many goats there actually were so they just closed it as a "precaution." Anyways, this past year, the biologists finally got enough money to do some research into the goat population and low and behold! there are enough goats to allow hunting. Unluckily, that's only 1 tag per unit per year. But that's better than nothing, and I don't claim to know how they determine the effects of hunting on the population. Maybe 1 tag per year is all the herd can sustain, but at least we get the chance to hunt again!
It's also frustrating how the late season archery deer hunt got taken away in the same general area. There are so many bucks that just die of old age in the winter up there now that I can't see how it would hurt to at least allow for a late season archery permit. But what can we do?
And I completely agree with you about choosing the premiere species. I don't want to be forced to choose, I want to be able to put in for all three.
Post by: bowhuntin on March 09, 2008, 12:54:00 AM
They can't go to only allowing people to put in for only one species because people already have points built up for all species and it wouldn't be fair to change the system now.
I don't see how that would not be fair, everybody would be affected in the same way. It would force those individuals to choose what species they really want to hunt more for the OIL tags, this would increase a guys odds. Plus they could go a step further and limit how many choices you can put down on the application and that would probably help some more. I don't think having to front the money for the tag and license would really deter many people because they could just charge it and if they aren't drawn then they will get their money back anyways. I won't be drawing a tag any time soon being that I am only going to put in for the point again this year for all the OIL tags because I don't have the time or money to do one of those hunts anyways.
Post by: boneaddict on March 09, 2008, 06:25:45 AM
NOW, if I had been applying for 13 years, every year, building up points, and they all of a sudden said sorry, choose your species, and I now was at the same level as someone who had decided to hunt goats for the first time this year......thats what would be unfair Bowhuntin.
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 09, 2008, 06:31:58 PM
As for picking your species...it might be unfair now. However, I thought that was a bad idea when it was implemented some time ago.
Post by: boneaddict on March 09, 2008, 06:44:08 PM
Post by: bowhuntin on March 09, 2008, 06:44:17 PM
NOW, if I had been applying for 13 years, every year, building up points, and they all of a sudden said sorry, choose your species, and I now was at the same level as someone who had decided to hunt goats for the first time this year......thats what would be unfair Bowhuntin.
Boneaddict,
You make it sound like you would lose all your points that you built up, I am saying that if they switched over to making some one choose which species they wanted most instead of applying for all of the species you would still keep your points so you would have 13 points squared compared to the guy that is applying for the first time. Your odds would be much higher of drawing IMO, but if they switched to a new system and didn't carry over your accumulated points from years of putting in then that would be unfair.
Post by: Ray on March 09, 2008, 06:45:14 PM
Post by: SkookumHntr on March 09, 2008, 06:58:35 PM
Post by: boneaddict on March 09, 2008, 08:06:30 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 09, 2008, 09:45:51 PM
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 10, 2008, 08:50:55 AM
Thank you for your email to the Director regarding special permit drawings. He has asked me to respond to your issues. I understand that you have spoken to several staff members from the Department recently about the drawing. I also want to assure you that the Department has been working with our contractor, Outdoor Central, to correct the problems associated with last year's special permit drawing.
The issue regarding the drawing odds for "permit only" species has surfaced many times in the past few years. We developed several options including asking applicants to provide up-front license fees before applying for mountain goat, big horn sheep, and moose permits during the 2006-08 hunting season package. None of the options were supported by a significant number of hunters. In addition, the up-front fee idea requires substantial resources and expense to refund the license fees to those who are not drawn.
Changes to the permit drawing system continue to be requested by hunters and we anticipate several new options being developed for public comment. The 2009-11 hunting season package development will be initiated this summer. We encourage you to stay active and participate in the process by checking the web site frequently.
Thanks again for your thoughts on improving the permit drawing system.
Sincerely,
Dave Ware, Game Division Manager
Whats funny is I haven't spoken to anyone over there about these issues, perhaps they are thinking of someone else. :)
Post by: boneaddict on March 11, 2008, 06:34:44 AM
Post by: billythekidrock on March 11, 2008, 08:50:13 AM
Post by: workstohunt on March 11, 2008, 09:27:15 AM
I do think that they could draw 50% of the tags from the top 10% of point holders, which would give the people with max points some kind of benefit for being diligent in applying.
I don't think requiring people to pay up front for license and tags is ethical, as it becomes a rich mans sport.
What ever they do it is for sure, not everyone will ever be guaranteed a tag at some point. There are just to many hunters wanting to hunt limited animals.
Its a tough subject and everyone has an opinion. It is what it is for now, and the people drawing probably think it is a good system ;) I myself drew last year only to have the drawing not be certified and ended up not being drawn 2nd time around.
Keep up the discussion--it is very interesting
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 11, 2008, 09:58:08 AM
I hiked throughout the 80's, 90's, and up to the present. I see tons of goats out there. Around glacier peak and in a lot of country too rough for people to hike. They are there if you are out there. Go ask the trailblazers where they are at... I'm not saying let's kill them all off. I just believe they are being pretty conservative with the tags because of a lack of population data. They use to give tags out for areas up out of granite falls towards Glacier Peak. I have seen them a bunch around Lake Byrne on every hike up. I have seen them on Nason Ridge nearly every hike. Yet we have no tags for those areas...
Shawn
Post by: Ray on March 11, 2008, 10:10:21 AM
Post by: SkookumHntr on March 11, 2008, 12:48:08 PM
Post by: Intruder on March 12, 2008, 12:49:32 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 12, 2008, 01:56:43 PM
Post by: Branden on March 12, 2008, 05:31:44 PM
Post by: Ray on March 12, 2008, 06:01:30 PM
Post by: huntnphool on March 12, 2008, 06:12:30 PM
Post by: Muleyslyr on March 14, 2008, 01:50:13 PM
Thanks PB, you know if you could guarantee me that I would live to be at least 80, I would apply every year and not complain once that I didnt get drawn :chuckle:
Ha....I doubt that! ;)
You know phool it's just one of those things you put in for and hope for but obviously never expect. I have 10pts. myself for Moose, Sheep, and Goat.....but don't ever expect to draw. The only thing I can do is if I do happen to draw one, that's gonna be my "hunt". Meaning every other tag I have is instantly gonna take a back seat. I would love to draw one while I'm still in my "younger" years too, but if I happen to be 55, hopefully I'll be retired and can spend every minute on that tag. :)
Good Luck.....
Post by: bobcat on March 14, 2008, 02:12:59 PM
IMO each point should up your odds significantly. I don't mind that the system gives a 0 or 1 point guy a shot.... in fact I like that. I hate the systems that require you to have a certain # of points to even be in the drawing (like CO.). However, any changes that would give increasingly better odds to each point accumulated would be a great change.
But the system already is that way! It doesn't need to be changed to give "increasingly better odds to each point accumulated." Don't you know points are squared? Which means a person with 2 points has 4 chances and a person with 10 points has 100.
Post by: ramslam on March 14, 2008, 02:18:57 PM
I'm just going to share my opinion on the OIL species (goat, sheep & moose). Draw odds or the probability of drawing a tag only has two factors: the number of hunters and the number of permits. In order for the odds to increase we either have to have more permits or fewer applicants. Although arguements are being made that permit levels are too conservative, the reality is the permit levels will only vary slightly. So, for our odds to increase we have to reduce the number of applicants. There lies the great debate.
How do we limit the number of applicants? I think there are only two choices, you either force them to chose a species OR you increase the cost to apply. Both options have solid arguements but talk is cheap, if we really want to change the system everyone will have to give a little one way or another (ie choices or cash). So, which is it?
Post by: Ridgerunner on March 14, 2008, 02:22:59 PM
Post by: bowhuntin on March 14, 2008, 03:12:44 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on March 14, 2008, 03:58:31 PM
I would gladly give up all my chances to ever draw an OIL species if I was given one sheep tag. I would, forever, not apply for any other OIL tag ever again. So what would you do? Would you give up your chance to draw all three OIL tags for one guaranteed OIL tag?
Shawn
Post by: rackattack on March 14, 2008, 04:28:47 PM
Post by: bowhuntin on March 14, 2008, 04:55:39 PM
I would pay more and choose one species. Anything to increase the odds for people who really want it.
I agree with you on that, but not applying for any of the other OIL tags after being drawn I wouldn't agree to that.
Post by: Red Dawg on March 14, 2008, 04:57:39 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 14, 2008, 05:01:41 PM
Post by: ramslam on March 14, 2008, 07:12:18 PM
Post by: sasquatch on March 30, 2008, 04:01:08 PM
FYI. Hope this works. Check the links at the bottom of the article. They are more interesting reading than the article.
My opinion is that the tag allocations are conservative. I see goats all over east Lewis County that aren't in the Smith Creek or Tatoosh units. Maybe these goats are members of smaller sized heards determined not enough to hunt.