• Just a heads up: On November 13th, we'll be performing some updates on the website. You might experience some unresponsive pages, though we’re hoping for minimal disruption. Thanks for your understanding!

Controlled hunt future in Idaho

freebird63

freebird63

Active Member
Messages
373
I have been hearing rumblings that IDFG is going to change the controlled hunts, someone said they are going to a points system. I personally don't know anything about how the points system works. Has anyone else heard these rumors??? and can anyone explain how the points systme works???
 
I think everyone else on these forums has heard these rumors as there has been a lot of heated debates in recent months. But I will none the less respond to your question. Several years ago IDFG had tried to implement a Nevada style "Bonus" Point system but they needed some extra $$ to update computer systems, and get the sytem off the ground. Although the point system would no doubt have brought in far more money then the start-up costs the legislature shot down the request for the money. Recently due to the fact that the F&G has had problems bringing in enough cash and they cannot even sell all the big game tags that they have availible the rumors have been going around again. This year there was a bill passed that had included in the fine print of it athourization for the F&G to start up a point system, although they have made no public comments about it.
As for how the system works, if they do adopt a "Bonus" (not "Preference")point system like they were planning on doing in the past you would simply get a point every year you applied and did not draw. You would get your name "thrown in the hat" more based on how many points you had thus increasing your odds. Alot of the people on these forums against the points system will either lie or unknowingly tell you that you will have to have a certain # of points like in a "Preference" point system and that if you were too young or did not get in the point game from the start of it you would never draw a tag, but thats not true. Idaho has never talked about a "Preference" sytem and in a "Bonus" point system someone with no points could still draw even the hardest to draw tags, but the more points you have obviously the better your odds.
Also alot of the folks against have also tried to scare people into believing that a point system would have to mean an end to OTC general tags and someone in past forums even said that you may only get to hunt once every 15-20 years, once again not true.
 
I can't remember where it was that I read about it. At least now I have a better idea of what they are talking about. Thank you.
 
>I think everyone else on these
>forums has heard these rumors
>as there has been a
>lot of heated debates in
>recent months. But I will
>none the less respond to
>your question. Several years ago
>IDFG had tried to implement
>a Nevada style "Bonus" Point
>system but they needed some
>extra $$ to update computer
>systems, and get the sytem
>off the ground. Although the
>point system would no doubt
>have brought in far more
>money then the start-up costs
>the legislature shot down the
>request for the money. Recently
>due to the fact that
>the F&G has had problems
>bringing in enough cash and
>they cannot even sell all
>the big game tags that
>they have availible the rumors
>have been going around again.
>This year there was a
>bill passed that had included
>in the fine print of
>it athourization for the F&G
>to start up a point
>system, although they have made
>no public comments about it.
>
>As for how the system works,
>if they do adopt a
>"Bonus" (not "Preference")point system like
>they were planning on doing
>in the past you would
>simply get a point every
>year you applied and did
>not draw. You would get
>your name "thrown in the
>hat" more based on how
>many points you had thus
>increasing your odds. Alot of
>the people on these forums
>against the points system will
>either lie or unknowingly tell
>you that you will have
>to have a certain #
>of points like in a
>"Preference" point system and that
>if you were too young
>or did not get in
>the point game from the
>start of it you would
>never draw a tag, but
>thats not true. Idaho has
>never talked about a "Preference"
>sytem and in a "Bonus"
>point system someone with no
>points could still draw even
>the hardest to draw tags,
>but the more points you
>have obviously the better your
>odds.
>Also alot of the folks against
>have also tried to scare
>people into believing that a
>point system would have to
>mean an end to OTC
>general tags and someone in
>past forums even said that
>you may only get to
>hunt once every 15-20 years,
>once again not true.


Nevada's point sysyem gets your "name in the hat" once regardless of how many points you have. Thats the system Idaho would adopt so I'm told. So your spreading misinformation. Go apply for some top tier Nevada hunts. 15-20 years is about right.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-09 AT 10:56PM (MST)[p]"Nevada's point sysyem gets your "name in the hat" once regardless of how many points you have. Thats the system Idaho would adopt so I'm told. So your spreading misinformation. Go apply for some top tier Nevada hunts. 15-20 years is about right."

HUH? Nevada's point system actually squares your # of bonus points so you get your name in the hat quite a bit more with every point you accumulate. So I'm not sure what your talking about there. Also even though it was a Nevada style system that was being talked about, I don't think it is fair to compare the states and think that an Idaho tag will be as tough to get as a "top tier" Nevada tag. According to the Nevada DOW website their population of MuleDeer is estimated around 100k while IDFG says that Idaho has 3x that much at 300k.
So get your facts strait before you try to spread misinformation.
 
HUH? You need to do some research before you mouth off.

The point squared system squares your points, draws numbers randomly, your lowest number is thrown in the pool. The lower your number the better chance you have.You get ONE NUMBER. The points guarantee nothing and plenty of guys are maxed out and don't draw for years...........Again the points guarantee nothing. As a non-res you can forget elk or any of the better Mule deer hunts. Guide allocated is pretty much the only way.

You are right about game populations though. Idaho has more. Thats why we can support general hunts here.

What is it you hate so much about everyone having equal chance to draw?
 
i came from washington a state that also has a nevada style bonus point system, go post about the bonus point system on the site hunting-washington.com and see the responses you get, every hunter in washington hates the system, it will still take 10-15 years to ever draw a decent tag if you ever even draw at all, my dad has been applying for all species since the bonus point system was implemented and in that 15 year period has drawn one elk tag and a bighorn sheep tag, other than that on deer, moose and goat and most years elk he gets a big fat not drawn notice, tags with tough odds will be just as hard if not harder to draw with the implementation of the bonus point system for example i will use unit 40 deer tag, you have 195 tags with roughly 2000 applicants per year, now add bonus points and lets just go ahead and add another 1000 applicants per year just because of the point system, so the first year of the point system your odds will actually go down to about 1-30, with everyone being equal with 1 chance in the hat, now in year 2 you have about 2800 people applying with 4 chances in the hat and about 200 with 1 chance in the hat meaning your odds of drawing which now equals about 11,400 chances in the hat and you have 4 of them, so now your odds are about 1 in 2800 chances of your number being pulled, year 3 lets just assume none of those who drew in year 1 drew in year 2 so now you have about 2600 people with 9 chances apiece plus roughly 200 with 4 chances and roughly 200 with 1 chance now you have 9 chances out of 24,400 and your odds just went back up to 1-2711 chances of being drawn, next year you have 16 out of 41,200 chances so as you can see the odds arent improving by much in any given year but what you do see is a ton of chances flooding the barrel of numbers to pull from therefore your odds dont increase it becomes more and more like a lottery every year, compared to the current system we have where every year you have the exact same chance as everyone else, and god forbid you actually pull a tag in year 1 because then you are playing catchup for the next 10-15 years until all those in the max points pool draw and you actually get ahead of all those who dont draw, frankly i dont like those odds much
 
First of all I don't need to do anymore research because I know exactly how Nevada's system works as you seem to as well. But come on you make no sense when you try to twist it around saying you only get one number. Why would everyone who buys points there even do it then? You only keep your lowest and therefore best #, but you get as many different #'s assigned to your app as your points squared+1 equals. And you can only draw one tag per species application so why would'nt they throw out all but your best #. Also of course there is no guarantee in this system (A fact that throws out some of the B.S other folks on these forums have been spreading) but with the more points you accumulate the better your odds of drawing a tag. But this is a pointless conversation.
As far as me hating everyone having equal chance to draw. That comes from that the last time I drew a controlled hunt tag was 1999. I have put in every year since (exept this year) and not for the hardest to draw areas, the deer unit for example over the years has had anywhere from 33% to 18% odds over that time. In the same time frame my uncle and cousin have drawn 3 times. And the general area I still love to hunt has gone way down hill lately and became a zoo. I would just like to know I have a little better odds of drawing a controlled hunt after waiting this many years. Also I think it would be a big $$ maker and maybe the F&G could start managing the herds better and not need to sell so many non-res tags.
By the way the reason I did not apply this year was because about 5 years ago I decided to play the points game in Nevada and guess what it already got me a great deer tag.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-15-09 AT 04:58PM (MST)[p]Thats cool you drew. What area and what weapon?

Just want to be sure everyone knows the facts about the bonus point deal. your original post would lead people to believe you get your app in the pool as many times as the number of points you have. Not the case. You get one number....thats it. I hear you on the Idaho system. Been quite awhile since I've drawn anything of quality. Meanwhile I've drawn Nevada twice since '98. Both times my last choice and could not be considered a high profile trophy area.
But I know of guys who apply year in and year out and don't draw. Same in Idaho. Some are lucky, some are not.

My opinion has changed a bit on this issue. I'm no longer completely opposed to Idaho adopting a point system. Frankly I just don't see a real need to do so.
 
I put in for hunts in most western states. Ive drawn out something in all except Colorado and Nevada. I have drawn most of my permits in NM and ID both are no point states. I live in UT and turned 34 today been putting in for as much as they allow since I could. I've drawn 1 archery elk permit and 1 antelope permit. I am personally not a fan of point systems but I will admit I am fairly lucky outside of Utah on the draw. I would rather not see a point system. But I'm also from UT and ID can and will do what is "best" for themselves. I do love to hunt ID and do every year.
 
I drew a 221-223 rifle tag. Had a great scouting trip, but things had changed come our season and the bucks were not where we saw them the month before. Passed on a few, holding out for one of the nice ones we saw in Sept. ended up eating my tag, but my buddy did shoot a decent 174" buck. It was very nice to hunt an area with alot less pressure then I'm use to.
And I too just want to be sure everyone really knows what IDFG has talked about doing with the point system. In previous posts folks had said things about having to have max points to get a tag as in a Preference system and if you did not get in the first year you could never get a tag. Also there was some talk about them not being able to have OTC tags with a point system and you might only hunt once every 5-10 years, but there is no reason that they would have to change anything with the OTC tags (although I wish they would make a few changes for the sake of the herds). I just think some people have unnecessarily freaked out at their misconceptions of what Idaho has talked about implementing. It may not really change your draw results that much, if your lucky you will still get tags more than folks like myself who don't have much draw luck at all.
 
To say you only have one chance in the draw is ridiculous. The draw is where you get your multiple chances they only take the lowest number. Once you have that number there is no draw it has already taken place with your multiple chances. If you are the type of guy with a conservative personality and you truly understand how the draws work points make sense. Then you know you will get something at some pt in time for your investment. If you are the type of guy who likes to bet on the river or for some reason you have beat the odds and drawn several tags over the years or you sometimes miss the deadlines and miss the draw then no pts makes sense to you. I put in for every Western state every year and I know I would draw tags at some pt in time in Idaho and New Mex if they had pts. I have not drawn either state. As for throwing Washington into the mix you have no understanding of what is going on if you think it would increase your odds of drawing by not having bonus pts. The problem in Washington is there are very limited tags and many applicants. Most decent hunts are 1 in 40 or worse so if you take pts out of the equation you should draw a tag every 40 yrs. Max pts are 15 or so, so until you have 40 pts there is no reason to complain. Guys complain that they can not draw and they put in for extremely tough draws. As for sheep or goat or moose you will never draw no matter what they do. Everyone has lots of pts for these species. At 1 in 1000 odds what do you expect. At least for deer and elk if you put in for some units with 1-10 to 1-25 odds you will get a tag some day. These guys who think they should have drawn and only put in for Blues elk tags wake up and smell the coffee. You can draw a sheep in Montana easier than a Blues elk tag.
 
My contention has been all along that a points system like that really will not help you draw high profile hunts. Your right you get multiple numbers of which you get the lowest (they range into the millions from what I understand) but the idea that this is a drawing with your app in a pool multiple times is not true and I think everyone should know that.

Just like 12gauge said the flood of "point chasers" will further dillute your odds. Particularly for non-res IMO.

They way Idaho's system is currently, As long as your applying for hunts with reasonable odds, you have a chance every year and you'll probably draw at some point.
 
as the system stands right now most sheep goat and moose tags here in idaho have about 1 in 5 to 1 in 50 odds right now with the way things are, if they implement a point system they will have to do away with the current pick your species app system, then sheep goat and moose tags here in idaho will be just like washington, and our deer and elk tags will be more difficult to draw, trust me point systems are nice when you dont really think about them, but when it really comes down to it a bonus point system doesnt improve odds much, bonus points systems just flood the system with more chances for everyone, if idaho really wants to implement a point system i think they should do straight preference points, but i would prefer idaho just leaves the current draw system in place
 
"if they implement a point system they will have to do away with the current pick your species app system, then sheep goat and moose tags here in idaho will be just like washington,"

I do not believe this is a valid assumption. To my knowledge the Commission has not been leaning that direction. Past discussions actually included further restricting the number of species one could apply for - closer to the Utah approach (which now applies only to residents).

For more specific information, you can do a search on bonus points in the Idaho, General, and Sheep/Goat forums for the several past forum discussions on the subject.

Tom Keegan
IDFG Salmon Region Wildlife Manager
 
Part of the problem with setting up a system is there is 2 sides of a system. The side as is affects hunters and tags and the economic side which affects revenue for the State. The best system to produce revenue is to let everyone put in for everything because from the state perspective they are making more money in application fees with the same amount of tags. The best scenario for draw odds is to make us pick only one species which would make for excellent draw odds but a lot less revenue. Most guys for a nominal fee would put in for everything if that is a choice which severely dilutes odds.
 
Heres a great idea, how about making the waiting period 3 years if you DO draw a tag? Me thinks Id is just desperate for cash?
 
I would prefer to scatter hunters out by making hunters pick their weapon and get rid of late hunts or severly restrict them. Some management hunts such as cow hunts where some numbers need to be reduced would be all right. This way you wouldn't need any sort of bonus point system.
 
Except for the fact that the IDFG has a huge revenue problem. That is most likely going to be the reason they go to a point system. The amount of tags given out could decrease (help with their management) but the revenue would still increase with more non-res buying licenses, and then playing the points game. It would be a win-win for the game managers (or mis-managers) in Idaho.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-09 AT 04:18PM (MST)[p]If it would make it better coughing up more money for a relatvely inexpensive lic & tag wouldn't be so bad. We need to reduce harvest some how. Hell I haven't shot a deer in Idaho since 1992, just before for the winter kill. I have bought only 3 deer tags since that time, just wasn't enough deer in my opinion, but now I have an 11yr old son and sure would like it that there were some deer for him to see. By the way I haven't been able to draw on any of the good deer units in the state. Maybe I'll have to go north after whitetails.

None of the non-residents that I know still wouldn't pay the state $150.00 just for a point in the draw. In order to get more of them to apply they would have to cheapen it up some what just to apply. AZ is expensive to apply for but they kill huge bucks and bulls. Idaho DOESN'T offer that luxury!
 
It seems after reading all the treads for and against either a point system or a controlled hunt goes back to whether or not someone is going to have a better chance at drawing a unit 45 buck tag. Frankly 45 is the only unit in the state that has a management plan anything like the Arizona strip or the Henries in Utah, I don't know how many years it's been managed this way but it produces some very good bucks, I never use to have to worry about applying for it. There are alot of other units in this state that can and will produce more and consistently bigger bucks than unit 45, given a better management plan. I could care less about hunting unit 45, I would love to hunt my own side of the state, where I know where I'm going and where to look!! We can grow'em plenty big on the east side too! If it takes a point system or totally controlled hunt for the whole damn state I'm all for it.
Same goes for elk, the 90's around here were outstanding, there were alot of quality bulls to be seen and hunted, but with the late hunt drive by shootngs and the indian hunts, we are back to where they didn't have a spike hunt because of too few bulls!
Sure I'd like to hunt every year, but we may have to sacrifice opportunity. In the end unit 45 may not be that tough of a tag to draw!
 
I say bring on bonus points..preference points...whatever...anything that MAKES me think I have a better chance, GREAT....it cannot be any worst than it is now...I have drawn 1 time in about 12 (this year) in a unit that has draw odds from 1 in 3 to 1 in 5....
 
I think we are getting to the point in this state that above the age of appoximate youth whatever that may be, that we should be choosing our weapons. There are things they can be doing to lower the pressure of the bucks in rifle season, including going to more controlled hunts.
 
We have plenty of deer. Unless your blind and lazy you can find plenty of small bucks. Hell even I can find 4-5 almost every day I go out. Now look for even 3 year old deer and maybe you can find one every couple of days. Look for something 4-5 years old and maybe you can glass one every other year, but not likely shoot. Most of us probably will never see a 6+ year old buck, even on late season wintering ground.

So if you take the bucks we have and age them all 2 years, you would have pretty close to what we expect. I don't think this is so much due to "late" season hunts as that is when the few older bucks that are harvested are killed. What we need to do is let the 1-3 year olds that are so numerous now get to be 3-5 year olds and the only way to do that is STOP hunting for 2 years and hope that mother nature doesn't wipe them out in a big winter kill like 92' or even 2 years ago.

So are you all willing to give up your trophy hunts and even your meat hunts for 2 years to let them all get older. Let's say cut all tag's by 80%, with no OTC for this period.

So I am not a biologist and I would love to hear from SalmonF&G to correct me. I do get tired of hearing the argument of Trophy Hunters, of which I am one, who think their opinion is the only one that counts. The fact is that more resident hunters care about meat and the opportunity to hunt, not necessarily a big one. I would prefer more quality myself, but at least acknowledge that Fish and Game has to listen to the masses and not just the Trophy hunters who like to post on the internet. The reality is if you are a meat hunter you do pretty well in Idaho. Out of State hunters probably lean more toward the trophy mentality, especially since they are paying the big $$.
 
HaHa, if I were blind & lazy I wouldn't get much done in my line of work. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on late hunts. Trophy hunters and lazy hunters generally are the ones who want late hunts, most of these hunts tend to be drive by shootings. While I'm not a wildlife biologist I have spent 15yrs working sept's & oct's for some on a privately owned ranch in Utah, while I don't always agree with them, they do put out a pretty good product, by the way deer hunts stop Oct 31.
I'm not necessarily addvocating more "trophy" hunting, I would like to see more numbers. Maybe your winter ranges are flush with deer , if so tell F&G to send some of these meat hunters your way, it sounds like the deer need to be thinned out, not the case here. After winter die offs F&G don't let numbers recover. Since they won't feed them, it would be nice if they could figure out how to ease the pressure on them! I'm all for 2yrs, hell I'm all for 5yrs, I'll get my meat elk hunting (by the way they are far easier to manage than mule deer) but sadly it will never happen. And if they did stop hunting for 2yrs, what are you going to do dump an otc tag on them, slaughter city!
As for those who say get off the road, sorry I have to laugh, if there isn't a road there's a 4wheeler trail, and there's seems to be more hunters than you think that take this advise to heart. In areas with this easy of access hunts need to be controlled far more than they are. And don't go into less hunter numbers, if you think that come join the crowds!
Maybe if F&G would control hunt the units that aren't in the huge wilderness areas, they could fluctuate the hunter numbers from year to year as need be. Damn, sorry to be so negative, maybe I'll have to take up golf!
 
I think Nevada has a great system. As a resident there, I drew two Bighorn sheep tags (a Desert and a California), two trophy Antelope tags, and numerous quality Mule deer tags under the points system. I then moved to Idaho 8 years ago and as a Nevada nonresident, have drawn a bull elk tag, another good antelope tag, and two more quality mule deer tags. In that same 8 year span in Idaho, applying every year as a resident, I have not drawn a single controlled hunt in this state. I think the bonus point system Nevada has works great because whether you have 0 points or 15, you still have a chance to draw, yet it rewards those that put in their time. I hope Idaho makes the change.
 
Heres a great idea, how about making the waiting period 3 years if you DO draw a tag? Me thinks Id is just desperate for cash..............+1
 
>Heres a great idea, how about
>making the waiting period 3
>years if you DO draw
>a tag? Me thinks Id
>is just desperate for cash..............+1
>
Me knows they are desperate for cash. How would a 3 year wait solve their $$ problem or help the poor game management?
 
It may not help their cash flow..
But it might help out some of that haven't drawn a tag for more than 20 years..
 
If you havn't drawn a tag in twenty years I'm assuming you apply for hunts with tough odds (correct me if I'm wrong).

That being the case, points systems like Nevada's wont help. In fact it may even diminish your already slim chance when all the non-res points chasers get on board.
 
Jake,

Assuming Runamuk is an Idaho resident, non residents would have no effect on him as a resident applicant under a points system like Nevada. Nonresident and resident quotas would remain seperate and therefore, not play against each other. And yes, a point system like Nevada's would help you with those tough draws. I am a walking exapmle of that. Se my above post, every one of those draws was a tough "trophy" limited entry draw that I was able to eventually get my hands on becasue of a bonus points system. Runamuk could continue to apply for that same tough hunt for another 20 years and still not draw under the current system. Fact of the matter is, his application this year gives him the same odds (based on number of applicants) as he has had the last 20 years and it hasn't worked yet. Take it from someone that has reaped the benefits of a bonus point system, it is worth it.
 
I have not drawn in 10+ years and the area I put in for Deer has had from a 1/3 to about a 1/5 chance over that time frame. I don't think those are too tough of draw odds, using the thinking of guys like Jake I should have drawn 2 to 3 times already. But this year I will have the same odds (4/5 that I don't draw again) and it maybe another 10 years before I draw to put me at 20 years with Runamuk.
And I agree with the above post about residents not seeing their odds getting worse. I am still not sure why any resident would be against a point system (unless they just have real good drawing luck). Its the only way IDFG will be able to bring in more $$ that they seem to need, and be able to possibly reduce the # of OTC tags sold to non-residents.
But for non-res I would take a little harder draw odds at first to be able to know that your non-refundable license fee was atleast going to improve your odds in the future.
 
I play in Nevada. I know that sysytem inside and out. Drawn twice since 97. Niether time was the area a "top tier" area. My last choice both times. If your applying for the better areas, particularly as a non-res, you've got a LONG wait ahead of you barring a massive stroke of luck. Same thing can be said for Idaho. (I've drawn four tags in Idaho over the same period of time, again, nothing spectacular but solid hunts)

Moosey, if you can't seem to buck the odds you just described, you've got bad luck. I would'nt read anything more into it than that. Your luck will change and you'll get your tag. or not.......
 
Yep im an Id. res. all my life im 47 yrs old. I haven't checked out the draw odds for awhile it's kind'a depressing.. It's unit 40 Deer..I don't see any reason to put in for an area that has better odds just for the sake of drawing a tag. I want what i want..
Heres a couple examples for you,, I have a buddy that has drawn a Deer tag there 4 times since it went to draw..
Another couple of guys they are brothers, Have drawn a Deer Or Elk tag or both in unit 40 for the last seven years, crap one of em had two Elk tags there last year.He drew a second chance and a super tag, how lucky is that???
I don't claim to have any answers , and i really don't understand all the points system jargin. All i really know is i have only drawn one Antelope tag since i was 17 years old.
And if i was to stop and think about how much i have soaked into the super tag chances i would be really pissed..
 
It sounds like you know very little about How Nevada's draw works. I lived in Nevada and drew archery tags every year in my best spot. Now I live here in Idaho. I have Bonus points for Nevada as a NR for Elk, Deer and Antelope.

I could have hunted my favorite unit for deer any of the last 6 years with only last year being less than a 50% chance. Antelope I could most likely draw next year if I want.
I only put in for my top two spots. I don't go deep on the application. It's my top two spots or nothing. Even a fifth choice of the Ruby's would be better than just about any hunt here in Idaho.

You could draw in Nevada with one or two points or 7 or 8 on any tag. At least their squared bonus point system has accountability. Idaho's system is as transparent as Obama's administration with who knows what goes on behind the lines.

Some people draw 40 and 45 and some of the other good tags on a consistant basis. Others can't draw a hunt with 4 or 5-1 odds in 20 years or more of trying.
Is it bad luck? How fair is our draw? I'd rather have Nevada's system and Nevada's hunting in a second. There's no excuse for the piss poor overall hunting in this state other than terible management.

This state is on an unrecoverable slide to being the worst managed state in the west. Ca. does a better job.
As long as Idaho's F&G manages for money first nothing will change.

If I were a NR I sure as hell wouldn't come here when you could go to Colorado and have much better hunting on a OTC tag.
 
>It sounds like you know very
>little about How Nevada's draw
>works. I lived in Nevada
>and drew archery tags every
>year in my best spot.
>Now I live here in
>Idaho. I have Bonus points
>for Nevada as a NR
>for Elk, Deer and Antelope.
>
>
>I could have hunted my favorite
>unit for deer any of
>the last 6 years with
>only last year being less
>than a 50% chance.
>Antelope I could most likely
>draw next year if I
>want.
>I only put in for my
>top two spots. I don't
>go deep on the application.
>It's my top two spots
>or nothing. Even a fifth
>choice of the Ruby's would
>be better than just about
>any hunt here in Idaho.
>
>
>You could draw in Nevada with
>one or two points or
>7 or 8 on any
>tag. At least their
>squared bonus point system has
>accountability. Idaho's system is
>as transparent as Obama's administration
>with who knows what goes
>on behind the lines.
>
>Some people draw 40 and 45
>and some of the other
>good tags on a
>consistant basis. Others can't
>draw a hunt with 4
>or 5-1 odds in 20
>years or more of trying.
>
>Is it bad luck? How fair
>is our draw? I'd rather
>have Nevada's system and Nevada's
>hunting in a second. There's
>no excuse for the piss
>poor overall hunting in this
>state other than terible management.
>
>
>This state is on an unrecoverable
>slide to being the worst
>managed state in the west.
>Ca. does a better job.
>
>As long as Idaho's F&G manages
>for money first nothing will
>change.
>
>If I were a NR I
>sure as hell wouldn't come
>here when you could go
>to Colorado and have much
>better hunting on a OTC
>tag.


Yeah, archery for a resident is obviously gonna have better odds of draw. Not too tough too figure that out. Still betting your "favorites" were not one everyone's favorite list. I've spoken with many resident hunters down there when hinting and scouting etc.........2-4 years per tag seems to be about average.

I'm willing to bet that even right now today, at a time when many of Idaho's herds ar hurting, The numbers still dwarf whats in Nevada. Nevada has no choice, thet have to be extremely conservative with tags because they just flat out don't have the resource.
 
So Jake, You are saying Idaho has more deer
per capa than Nevada?

90 percent of Idaho is mule deer country,
nevada probably has 60 to 65 percent
decent mule deer habitat I would go out on
a limb and bet Nevada has more deer per
mule deer rang than Idaho.
 
Not sure where your coming up with those figures but it doesn't matter.

Spin it how you want, Idaho has way more big game than Nevada. Therefore, we have the luxury to be more liberal with tags.

Also, Idaho has controlled units that are on par with anything you'll find down there. Yup, they are tough as hell to draw....but so are the top hunts in Nevada....
 
>We beat Nevada in wolves.


Yeah, tru dat! You prolly wanna blame that on F&G too, huh?
 
How about allocating 5-10% of the tags for a given unit to NON-RES and creating a POINT SYSTEM for them. Keep the RES system the same while letting the point chasers boost revenue for F&G and we the RESIDENTS can reap the rewards of better management for OUR herds.
 
>How about allocating 5-10% of the
>tags for a given unit
>to NON-RES and creating a
>POINT SYSTEM for them.
>Keep the RES system the
>same while letting the point
>chasers boost revenue for F&G
>and we the RESIDENTS can
>reap the rewards of better
>management for OUR herds.

That's one of the things I've been saying for years. With the increased revenue the F&G could finally start doing what is right for the herds instead of whats right for their bottom line. But I guess it just makes too much sense for gemstatejake and brymoore to go along with.
 
Moosey- There's no doubt non resident investment in our state would boost the departments funding, but I want to make it clear that I'm not a fan of imposing any type of point/bonus/whatever system on Idaho residents. I'm not a fan of catering to non residents either. But providing a portion of the tags, ideally 5%, and giving them a chance to invest in those tags in a draw separate of a resident draw would really boost revenue for the department.
 
I have nothing against NRs. I'm one myself in other states.

However, point systems are for suckers. Do the math - limits opportunity.
 
One thing I wish they would get rid of is the Zone tags for elk! It tends to lock hunters in on areas close to home with larger populations, where opportunity needs to be limited for otc deer hunts. And brymoore, we went to the F&G meeting last night, it sure didn't look like the the F&G numbers matched up with yours in SE Idaho, they seemed to be worried about the population, but were going to use the cross their fingers and hope for the best approach.
To make it fair lets go OTC for deer in south and western Idaho, alot of that country seems to be under hunted!!!!!
 
And brymoore,
>we went to the F&G
>meeting last night, it sure
>didn't look like the the
>F&G numbers matched up with
>yours in SE Idaho, they
>seemed to be worried about
>the population, but were going
>to use the cross their
>fingers and hope for the
>best approach.

What numbers did I post? Reread my posts, I'm not in SE Idaho. My only experience with deer in SE ID was that I was sharptail grouse hunting there during the opening weekend this year. I watched a bunch of deer being pushed around in the hills and saw a few bucks in the bed of trucks. The percentage of hunters I spoke with that had killed bucks seemed about normal for opening weekend - 20% or so.

Secondly, I've never said that MD weren't declining. I just don't blame F&G for changes outside their control (weather and wolves).
 
The way I understood you in that post, was that in your one experience in SE Idaho there was lots of deer running around, that the guys that live and hunt here don't have a clue. But now the deer are declining? So are you saying the two legged variety of predator doesn't have an effect on deer numbers? While the deer numbers are in trouble, not just here but in alot of places, is an OTC tag and unlimited either sex tags for youth our best management tool, (F&G talked alot about their tool box). While I'm not sure a point system is the way to go,(F&G seemed pretty interested in the idea) I have no problem with more controlled hunts, especially where the access is easy, or where deer numbers need to be managed alot tighter. My God they get hunted for 4 months non-stop.
 
That's the way I understood his post as well. And in some of his previous posts he says the same things about there being plenty of deer around and everyone who thinks the #'s are declining are just not getting out there and hunting hard enough like he is. And if there are any problems its all the wolves fault even in the parts of the state with no wolves!
Man if your that afraid of the F&G taking away the OTC tags go to the meetings that they have all around the state and voice your opinion instead of spreading that crap that anyone familiar with Idaho knows is B.S. There are lots ways they could improve the herds while still allowing folks the opportunity to hunt every year.
 
>The way I understood you in
>that post, was that in
>your one experience in SE
>Idaho there was lots of
>deer running around, that the
>guys that live and hunt
>here don't have a clue.
>But now the deer are
>declining? So are you saying
>the two legged variety of
>predator doesn't have an effect
>on deer numbers? While the
>deer numbers are in trouble,
>not just here but in
>alot of places, is an
>OTC tag and unlimited either
>sex tags for youth our
>best management tool, (F&G talked
>alot about their tool box).
>While I'm not sure a
>point system is the way
>to go,(F&G seemed pretty interested
>in the idea) I have
>no problem with more controlled
>hunts, especially where the access
>is easy, or where deer
>numbers need to be managed
>alot tighter. My God they
>get hunted for 4 months
>non-stop.


When I speak about ID deer I'm talking about the areas I run in - SW and Central Idaho. I only had the one weekend this year in SE ID but I could have shot a little basket rack if I wasn't carrying a shotgun.

In general, I support the ID F&G's decisions. They're seeing more data and have more experience in managing wildlife than we do.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-10 AT 09:27PM (MST)[p]At the very least with a controlled hunt, if and when there is a weather related die off F&G could go to the public with their numbers, and I think most hunters would understand and actually agree with number cuts when needed. When numbers started trending back up, give more opportunity!!!
The biggest concern at the meeting was moose numbers, which I beleive right now is a bigger problem than deer. F&G didn't have any answers at all, actually said they didn't even count them. In units that at one time produced huge bulls and with good numbers, to very few and far between seeing any moose period. Manageing for at least a 35in spread doesn't seem to be working.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-10 AT 09:34PM (MST)[p]>That's the way I understood his
>post as well. And in
>some of his previous posts
>he says the same things
>about there being plenty of
>deer around and everyone who
>thinks the #'s are declining
>are just not getting out
>there and hunting hard enough
>like he is. And if
>there are any problems its
>all the wolves fault even
>in the parts of the
>state with no wolves!
>Man if your that afraid of
>the F&G taking away the
>OTC tags go to the
>meetings that they have all
>around the state and voice
>your opinion instead of spreading
>that crap that anyone familiar
>with Idaho knows is B.S.
>There are lots ways they
>could improve the herds while
>still allowing folks the opportunity
>to hunt every year.

Let's look at the last three hunting seasons in ID. 2007 had early weather and there was a slaughter on good bucks. It was a road hunters dream as the bucks were pushed out of the mountains. 2008 was a poor hunting year with no weather with the deer staying high in the mountains coupled with the extra bucks killed in 2007. Nobody was complaining in 2007 but after 2008 the world was ending. 2009 was a good year with some late weather and deer movement. The good hunters I know had chances at bucks.

I have no problem if F&G thinks certain units need to be controlled units to manage the herd. But they need to make that decision based on scientific data, not hearsay.

I don't know why your think my experiences are crap. I'm out doing it and live in deer and elk country. I'm seeing hundreds of deer and elk everyday right now. When I hunt, I'm hiking miles from the road. I don't own an ATV and don't road hunt. I put my time in and can usually find game.
 
Well if thats the case you're going to be pissed when they start that point system you hate so much!! F&G manager seemed very interested in a point system so that more $$$$ could be raised!! Didn't sound like you would be very supportive of that move.
 
SE Idaho needs help.......Sad to know what it once was as compared to what it is now. Also the two point hunts (specifically in the owyhee units) needs to end. Those are a couple changes I'd love to see made. I agree 100% that the F&G should manage game on a region by region basis. If emergency cutbacks or flat out closures are needed then I'm all for it.

But we sure as hell don't need sweeping change statewide. Thats how most of you guys come off....just ******* change everything. Well forget it. I'll fight that type of $hit till the end The second Idaho goes the route of controlled everything and points and maybe you get to hunt every third or fourth year, then I'm done. Time to go fishing. I'll gladly pay more money but you start taking the opportunity to hunt away then the hell with it. You guys want to play those games then you've got every other western state to play in. Leave Idaho out of the discussion. As has been proven many times Idaho hunters dont want that $hit here.
 
And you don't think the rest of us don't put in some serious time, hell if I can't walk in I can damn sure pack it in on the horses for however long it takes! And don't come on here with CRAP about areas you don't hunt, with heresay!!!!!!
And don't give me this CRAP about living in deer and elk country! WE live on what use to be deer winter range, that is now loaded with elk!!!(gotta love those elk). And 95% of the rest of my time is spent on the mountain working!
This deer number thing didn't just happen over night, it hasn't been good here since the 92-93 winter kill, and there has been some complaining all along in these areas by some. F&G #s for 5 hunting units in this wintering area was less than 2500 deer, thats a hugh chunk of country my friend, and thats not saying these deer will even spend their time here in the fall!! Elk numbers are over twice that in the same area, but they manage them with a controlled hunt basically, when the numbers get to high, they give more opportunity, when numbers go down they give less opportunity! Seems to me that should work with deer to! I don't feel like sweeping changes for the whole state are nessasary, I know little about alot of other parts of the state, and I will defer to those who do.
Money is whats going to get you a bonus point system not good mangement, but it does take money to manage!!!!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-06-10 AT 09:02PM (MST)[p]How do you make cut backs if the unit is not a controlled hunt? Like I said before I don't know if a point system is the way to go, but a ******* over the counter tag and unlimited youth either sex tags is a piss poor way to manage wildlife. If you guys want to shoot out your deer herds thats fine with me. If I remember right thats the reason all the south western units were put into 2pt and controlled hunts years ago was it was totally shot out.
From what I understood at the meeting we went and whined at, you may want to get your fishing pole out and grease up the reel. Manager said that their surveys were 50-50, and seemed pretty hopeful that something might eventually get done. Money speaks volumes!!!!!
 
Brymoore, are you insinuating that if the rest of us Great White hunters would just clean off our wind shields we would magically start seeing hundreds of deer. I beleive most of the guys on here could harvest a "basket rack buck" every year if given the notion, I see a FEW descent bucks every year, but choose not top participate in the mule deer hunt because of lack of numbers over all in this area, theres nothing better than see a big old muley buck, so the ones I see will hopefully live to breed a few does. Elk are entertaining enough for now, unless I can draw one of those tags west of here!!!!!
 
>LAST EDITED ON Mar-06-10
>AT 09:02?PM (MST)
>
>How do you make cut backs
>if the unit is not
>a controlled hunt? Like
>I said before I don't
>know if a point system
>is the way to go,
>but a ******* over the
>counter tag and unlimited youth
>either sex tags is a
>piss poor way to manage
>wildlife. If you guys want
>to shoot out your deer
>herds thats fine with me.
>If I remember right thats
>the reason all the south
>western units were put into
>2pt and controlled hunts years
>ago was it was totally
>shot out.
> From what I understood
>at the meeting we went
>and whined at, you may
>want to get your fishing
>pole out and grease up
>the reel. Manager said that
>their surveys were 50-50, and
>seemed pretty hopeful that something
>might eventually get done. Money
>speaks volumes!!!!!


How do you make cutbacks? well to me it seem as easy as saying, the herds are in trouble here, so we're gonna cap the tags, or make it four point only, or flat out close the season for a couple years, or whatever else they deem is needed. Kinda like they did this past season with the general sawtooth zone elk. Whats wrong with that?
I'm not for "shooting out" anything so don't put those kind of bull$hit statements in my mouth again. Idaho has mountain ranges that should always be general. Half the country in many units barely sees any pressure. I can say that with certainty because I hunt them every year. utterly alone and in fabulous mule deer country. Finding deer is no problem. FYI, No amount of management will completely shield populations from
declining and flourishing. The most key elements in that equation have little to due with hunting or management.
Frankly I highly doubt the reason for the two point hunt in the owyhees is due to herds decimated by hunters. My thought has been its a supplementary hunt in a contolled unit to provide some people with opportunity . IMO what they should do is $hit can that hunt and increase the tag numbers for unit 40 and the rest. Make that a resonable draw and eliminate the two point slaughter out there which I believe is keeping that already controlled unit from being all it could be. The country is open and generally easy to hunt.

Sounds to me like your so fixated on a specific area you won't expore others. There's a lot more to Idaho than just the southeast area which I agree need some help.

We'll see how it pans out but Idaho's resident hunters will generally not be too receptive to massive overhauls and more restrictions. Plenty of guys like myself will just say the hell with it. How much revenue will that cost F&G? I'm not totally against some kind of point system but Idaho needs to develop it's own. Adapted to fit the resource we have and what Idaho hunters want.......which is to hunt, point blank.
 
OK, most of that actually makes a lot of sense to me, so don't make any bullshit statements that I want to control hunt the whole ******* state, if you'll read my past comments I said the hugh wilderness areas had no reason to be control hunts for the facts that you just stated. The very reason I dislike the zone hunts, because it locks hunters in on units for elk so they won't travel anywhere else to hunt deer. And yes I am fixated on an area that gets far to much deer hunting pressure because access is far to easy with again, an OTC tag and unlimited youth either sex tags. I think it would be great if the state would put pressure on hunters to utilize our wilderness areas,of which more hunters used to do before zone tags, and we have used on occasion. I hunted 4 states last year so exploring is not that scarey.
Why would F&G, basically control hunt elk, with twice as many numbers, which are easier to contol number wise than deer and not control hunt deer other than with these bullshit late hunts,in my fixated areas, is beyond me! Putting a cap on tags is a contolled hunt, and a 4pt only restriction always kills off your best young buck genetics so, IMO it's no better than a 2pt restriction.
I'll agree with you there are places in this state that should be left OTC, no question. But I'll tell you I want to see controlled hunts, in my fixated units, to improve deer numbers and quality hunting over all.
As far as bonus points, it would be nice to hear some suggestions other than whats out there all ready!!!
 
>OK, most of that actually makes
>a lot of sense to
>me, so don't make any
>bullshit statements that I want
>to control hunt the whole
>******* state, if you'll read
>my past comments I said
>the hugh wilderness areas had
>no reason to be control
>hunts for the facts that
>you just stated. The very
>reason I dislike the zone
>hunts, because it locks hunters
>in on units for elk
>so they won't travel anywhere
>else to hunt deer. And
>yes I am fixated on
>an area that gets far
>to much deer hunting pressure
>because access is far to
>easy with again, an OTC
>tag and unlimited youth either
>sex tags. I think it
>would be great if the
>state would put pressure on
>hunters to utilize our wilderness
>areas,of which more hunters used
>to do before zone tags,
>and we have used
>on occasion. I hunted 4
>states last year so exploring
>is not that scarey.
> Why would F&G, basically
>control hunt elk, with twice
>as many numbers, which are
>easier to contol number wise
>than deer and not control
>hunt deer other than with
>these bullshit late hunts,in my
>fixated areas, is beyond me!
>Putting a cap on tags
>is a contolled hunt, and
>a 4pt only restriction always
>kills off your best young
>buck genetics so, IMO it's
>no better than a 2pt
>restriction.
> I'll agree with you
>there are places in this
>state that should be left
>OTC, no question. But I'll
>tell you I want to
>see controlled hunts, in my
>fixated units, to improve deer
>numbers and quality hunting over
>all.
> As far as
>bonus points, it would be
>nice to hear some suggestions
>other than whats out there
>all ready!!!


Well i guess we agree then, so quit arguing with me! HA! My thought process is that our Big Game herds are constantly fluxuating, I've seen boom and bust cycles several times in my life and I'm not THAT old! If i have a gripe regarding F&G it would be that they need to be more flexible and respond to what is happening in any given area..........Call me crazy but I kind of feel like individual hunters can manage themselves to a certain degree. I have not taken a muley in Idaho in several seasons because I agree that they are in a generally depressed state right now. I'd like to believe others are doing the same. I don't think that situation is isolated to just Idaho either. Mule Deer are in trouble in many areas throughout the west and my take is that it's probably never gonna be what it was regardless of how much we restrict hunting.

I have no input regarding bonus/preference/brownie points other than to say Idaho need a system FOR IDAHO. I still contend that as a general statement, we have more critters than say Nevada, so we dont need to be as restrictive with tags as they are.
Thats all I got to say about that.
 
>It sounds pretty simple to me,
>if you don't like the
>way Idaho is managed then
>by all means hunt your
>own state.


Custom, I'm 4th generation, Great Grandpa drove his wagon to Idaho in the late 1800's, when did yours roll in?
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-10 AT 10:18PM (MST)[p]>Oh you must have meant 4th
>generation jack ass. I get
>it now


LOL!!! Thanks for adding such insightful dialogue to this discussion.


Come on you can do better than that!
 

Similar threads

M
Where to go, where to look, what to do? For a big muley.
Replies
64
Views
3k
antlerradar
antlerradar
BrowningRage
Hunting with kids - Success!
Replies
3
Views
349
tailchasers
tailchasers
bstewy
Lucky Utah Once in a Lifetime
Replies
20
Views
2k
PleaseDear
PleaseDear

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_7424.jpeg
AEF21ADC-C648-4735-A86D-058FE1F9C5EA.jpeg
4D640600-0B5F-4A73-AE37-9D4981879FAB.jpeg
DF5C9201-40D8-4DB1-BEC2-B2537575764B.jpeg
56915.jpeg
IMG_3032.jpeg
AF38DD29-B0CA-4F88-857E-18FD5B6E5F1E.jpeg
20201003_174123.png
Magnum Velvet Muley
IMG_20200704_153421_246.jpg
Joe Herrero and his 13A buck, 11-14-2022.jpg
20230906_194905.jpg

Idaho Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Bearpaw Outfitters

Idaho Deer & Elk Allocation Tags, Plus Bear, Bison, Lion, Moose, Turkey and Montana Prairie Dogs.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, whitetail, bear, lion and wolf hunts and spend hundreds of hours scouting.

Jokers Wild Outdoors

Trophy elk, whitetail, mule deer, antelope, bear and moose hunts. 35k acres of private land.

Back
Top Bottom