Unlimited controlled hunts as 1st choice only?

[MichaelJ]

Saw this on the IDFG home page under public surveys and polls. I figured while we're waiting for the draws this would generate some good discussion! Personally, I think its a great idea. I think it could drop hunter numbers and raise the quality of hunting. Here's the question:

Currently, unlimited controlled hunts can be applied for as a first or second choice hunt during the controlled hunt application process, from May 1 - June 5. Unlimited controlled hunts have been used by the Department to provide hunting opportunities without restricting the number of hunters. This hunt framework is more restrictive than a general season hunt, but less restrictive than a controlled hunt with a limited number of tags. However, some unlimited controlled hunts result in higher-than-desired hunter numbers in these hunts, because many hunters use these hunts as their second choice when applying for controlled hunts, in case they don't draw their first choice.

" If unlimited controlled hunts were available only as a first-choice hunt, there would likely be fewer applicants for the hunts, so the unlimited number of tags could be maintained and any hunter who selected that hunt as their first choice could still apply and be assured of drawing. Unlimited controlled hunts do not restrict nonresidents to 10%, don't require hunters to sit out a year after drawing, and unlimited controlled hunts do not trigger outfitter allocation.
Alternatively, some unlimited controlled hunts will have to be converted to controlled hunts with a limited number of tags if the number of applicants is too high. Controlled hunts restrict nonresidents to 10%, they require hunters to sit out a year after drawing, and trigger outfitter allocation.

IDFG proposes to make unlimited controlled hunts available only as a first-choice controlled hunt?

Do You Support, Not Support, or have no Opinion on this issue?"

Mike

 

[fowladdict]

I'm confident it would improve draw odds on controlled hunts (probably not much), but I don't necessarily believe it would eliminate the "higher than desired number of hunters" in unlimited units. Can't they just cap the amount of tags to the "desired" number and quit calling it un-limited?

 

[baerman]

I'm for it. It still allows a guy like me who applies for trophy species and then can only apply for the unlimited controlled hunts for deer, elk, antelope. I usually only go for antelope because it's the only species that does not have otc tags. It should help draw odds, not take away from hunters with my scenario and not reduce revenue from IDFG. Sounds like a win-win.

 

[smokepoler63]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-12 AT 02:23PM (MST)[p]I don't care for the idea personally. The only way to hunt pronghorn with archery is by applying for and drawing an unlimited tag. I like to put in for rifle and muzzleloader hunts with my kids, but if we don't draw, I like to bowhunt them while the kids are in school. Making it a first choice only hunt kind of defeats the purpose of having an unlimited controlled hunt in my opinion.
Drawing an unlimited deer or elk hunt prohibits me from hunting other general season hunts, which is the purpose of these hunts. You have to have the permit to participate in the hunt and having the permit prevents you from hunting other hunts. What's the problem with this?

 

[MichaelJ]

I think that for deer and elk its a great idea. I could see why it would not be a good thing for antelope or a situation where the only way to hunt is a controlled hunt (unlimited or not).

Mike

 

[BPKHunter]

LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-12 AT 02:30PM (MST)[p]Take a look at these hunts. Units 20A, 26, 27, 36, and 73.

Units 26 and 27 are primarily back country hunts. In these units it most(80%) purchase as 1st choice, and a much larger portion(74%) are non-residents. These units only represent about 15% of Unlimited Controlled tags sold.

The remaining units, by contrast, are 38% 2nd choice, and 24% non-residents. These units represent 85% of the 2631 2011 unlimited controlled tags.

So if the goal is to take some pressure off the high demand controlled tags, I would focus on units 20A, 36, and 73. While the % of NR hunters is much lower in these units than in the wilderness, they are still much higher than normal and so I might charge a premium to take some pressure off of them, especially unit 73. Maybe even just set a fairly high cap.

**I realized after my original post, there are other critters than deer, you can see where my primary interest lies**

 

[UGAhunter]

I think they should leave it the way it is, but won't lose sleep either way. I live in and hunt an unlimited controlled hunt every year, but it is still nice to be able to apply for limited hunts elsewhere. I don't think there are enough UCH applicants to make much difference to the true limited hunt odds.

I think the unlimited controlled hunts are a poor way of managing hunter numbers. Either it should be limited, general, or quota.

I someone cannot apply for another deer hunt as first choice, then thy will apply for Moos/Sheep/Goat, and the UCH deer. Therefore, if they do require a first hunt choice, then those who apply for Moose/Sheep/Goat should not be able to apply for UCH deer.

 

[ElkManDan]

I love the idea especially if they would apply it to the OTC archery elk units that only have controlled hunts for rifle. It would eliminate the guys who only pick up a bow and chase elk in these units because they couldn't draw the rifle tag that they really long for. It would improve draw odds for rifle hunters in the prime draw rifle hunts. It would lower the pressure and # of tag holders during the archery season. The other units that have open rifle hunts could be left as OTC archery to give the rifle draw losers a place to go chase elk.

I don't see how everyone doesn't win in this situation

 

[NickM]

It would greatly improve the hunt odds AND make the unlimited hunts that much better! I only have a limited knowledge base when it comes to the unlimited hunts, in that last year I applied for the 21-A Pronghorn hunt, but I did choose this as my first choice. There were a TON of people hunting in those areas (the first day!). After that, I had most of the unit I was focusing on to myself, for the most part. There were not many others out there every day. However, I do know that if they had to choose the unlimited hunt or a different draw hunt, there would have been a lot less people out there.


I like the idea and I think it would be very good for all the animals that have unlimited hunt options.

 

[idelkslayer]

I like the idea. Some of the comments so far are exactly why IDFG wants to make this change. The idea that you put in for the tag you really want and use the unlimited as a backup is exactly what they are trying to stop, too many people end up with the tag. With the unlimited tags being available only as a first choice, then folks will really have to choose where they want to hunt and this should spread people out more, and allow the unlimited hunts to stay guaranteed to those who truly want them. The only other option, which I find less acceptable, is to make it an otc tag with a quota and first-come-first-served. switching to a controlled hunt is unacceptable to me.

I say this mostly as far as the deer and elk hunts are concerned.

 

[MichaelJ]

Even though I am for the change as already mentioned, I was one of the ones who put in for an unlimited deer tag as a back up draw this year. The nice thing is we aren't required to buy that tag until later in the summer so it really is a nice back up to have. I'm still for the change even though it would possibly affect me in future seasons.

Mike

 

[NickM]

I think that it affects the Pronghorn hunts more than the Elk and Deer. If you don't draw a Pronghorn hunt you can't get an OTC tag like Deer and Elk. Personally, for that reason alone I would like to see it changed so that you have to put it as your first choice.