One tag system

[Davey Crockett]

I'm surprised at how so many people are full of the opinion that there are two sides, As far as I know all deer hunters are in the same boat together.

 

[Obi-Wan]

The 105,000 applicants number includes deer gun, muzzleloader, youth, and landowner applicants so if used to calculate for a 1 tag only draw that number would not apply. I have been looking for but have been unsuccessful in finding the # of applicants for the 17 deer gun applicants only. In a 2016 G&F article it says nearly 74,200 applicants applied for the 49,000 licenses available so unless we had 30,000 more applicants in 2017 than this number did not include muzzleloader, landowner, or youth. https://gf.nd.gov/magazine/2017/feb/2016-drawing https://gf.nd.gov/news/1819

2016 comparison
49000 tags ( number from 2016 article )
75000 applicants ( number from 2016 article )
65.3 % of applicants getting a tag.

2016 comparison with 1 tag changes made
59000 tags (10,000 more tags)
65000 applicants (10,000 fewer applicants)

90.8% applicants get tags - this sounds great on an overall basis

I know these number are not correct but if someone could find the actual number and do the math at least we would be talking apples for apples for the amount of applicants to the amount of avail license

Then your math isn't correct either. I was just dividing up the extra amount all units equally. I noted in a previous post that some units will be higher and some will be lower.

Your math is assuming you can equally divide the tags up evenly among the units which isn't necessarily true either. Each unit would have to have a different number of increased tags not an even gain across the board. Same with my example, it can't be an even gain across all units but we have no way of knowing how many of the statewide bow tags can be allocated to each unit.

Not trying to start an argument.

 

[Bfishn]

2016 comparison with 1 tag changes made
59000 tags (10,000 more tags)
65000 applicants (10,000 fewer applicants)

Where are you coming up with 10,000 extra tags and 10,000 fewer applicants?

 

[You]

I'm surprised at how so many people are full of the opinion that there are two sides, As far as I know all deer hunters are in the same boat together.

Sure not much of a response. Are you still working on your counterpoints or are we finally getting through your "thick skull"?

 

[WormWiggler]

2016 comparison with 1 tag changes made
59000 tags (10,000 more tags)
65000 applicants (10,000 fewer applicants)

Where are you coming up with 10,000 extra tags and 10,000 fewer applicants?

I am probably wrong but I think the hypothetical example is that 10000 more tags is by including archery tags in the total, and the 10000 fewer applicants is archers that would not apply. I don't know if those numbers pass the smell test...

 

[lunkerslayer]

I'm still waiting for bow hunters to tell me if they woould still get a tag if they couldn't hunt over a feed pile.

 

[Fishmission]

Never tried the feed pile. I hunt trails and funnels . Many years I don’t even pull the string back, but that’s how I like to hunt. I’ll never give up bow hunting until I’m too old to do it.

 

[Obi-Wan]

2016 comparison with 1 tag changes made
59000 tags (10,000 more tags)
65000 applicants (10,000 fewer applicants)

Where are you coming up with 10,000 extra tags and 10,000 fewer applicants?

These numbers are hypothetical but It was from a G&F article which I believe it was Williams who stated the proposal would add 10,000 to 12,000 more license in the hands of hunters by reducing the number of bow tags that would be given out.

Also the 10 & 10 were used by bckhntr post 148 and KJS-ND post 179

 

[dust in the wind]

The 105,000 applicants number includes deer gun, muzzleloader, youth, and landowner applicants so if used to calculate for a 1 tag only draw that number would not apply. I have been looking for but have been unsuccessful in finding the # of applicants for the 17 deer gun applicants only. In a 2016 G&F article it says nearly 74,200 applicants applied for the 49,000 licenses available so unless we had 30,000 more applicants in 2017 than this number did not include muzzleloader, landowner, or youth. https://gf.nd.gov/magazine/2017/feb/2016-drawing https://gf.nd.gov/news/1819

2016 comparison
49000 tags ( number from 2016 article )
75000 applicants ( number from 2016 article )
65.3 % of applicants getting a tag.

2016 comparison with 1 tag changes made
59000 tags (10,000 more tags)
65000 applicants (10,000 fewer applicants)

90.8% applicants get tags - this sounds great on an overall basis

I know these number are not correct but if someone could find the actual number and do the math at least we would be talking apples for apples for the amount of applicants to the amount of avail license


This is true - however something else I just found - the number of licenses included gratis tags and non resident tags and muzzleloader. So those need to come out as well. I could find the gratis and non resident tags but not the muzzleloader. So it's pointless to try run the numbers again.

Now the other thing to consider is this - if we were take out the 10,000 applicants and increase the tags available for the lottery. Who's to say they will all go to rifle. Why can't some of them go to muzzleloader, gratis and rifle? After all, we should increase across all three right? See where I'm going with this?

Do we know what percentage of tags will go to all 3 groups or will they only go to one or two groups ? We don't know. This was never mentioned that I'm aware of!

Do we know that there will be 10,000 (rough number) of fewer applicants? No we don't. It could be more or it could be less. That was a rough guess by the G&F. If you look at the 2016 information - there was also an increase in applicants from 2015 to 2016 of 4400. Will that trend continue? we don't know.

There are a whole lot of what if's and actually this discussion brought up something that I have never heard discussed when that plan was proposed. That is - By going to a 1 tag system and as a result there are are more tags available - where and how will they be placed - rifle, muzzleloader and/or gratis? After all, I'm sure the muzzleloader guys would like the ability to draw a tag sooner as well. Who knows, there might be more gratis tags needed as well.

While my % is off due to factors not considered previously, what I do see is that it won't change things as much as you would want it to.

Like I said before, it might shave 1 year off of a 4 year wait all while removing opportunities from every other hunter out there and for what reason - purely a social reason - there hasn't been one biological reason mentioned for doing it. It may also be a wash too! if we have an increase of applicants and/or bow hunters decide to still apply for the lottery.

The system we have now provides the same opportunity for ALL hunters. If you choose to not participate in only some of them - that is your choice. The problem is we have more people applying for limited number of tags. Now, those tags are slowly increasing but we don't know if that trend will continue either. We also don't know if the number of people applying will continue to increase or will it start to decrease.

Now if you can come up with a way to have a 1 tag system that allows for it to be used in any season (archery,rifle and muzzleloader) I'll listen.

To change it all up just because "I want to get a rifle tag sooner" is BS.

 

[You]

if they woould still get a tag if they couldn't hunt over a feed pile.

as a representative for all bow hunters, yes

now shut the hell up

 

[dust in the wind]

I'm still waiting for bow hunters to tell me if they woould still get a tag if they couldn't hunt over a feed pile.

The cows I hunt around would eat that pile before any deer would. So Yes I would.

 

[Davey Crockett]

[QUOTE=bckhntr

Now if you can come up with a way to have a 1 tag system that allows for it to be used in any season (archery,rifle and muzzleloader) I'll listen.


That is the concept of a one tag system , I think we are finally on the same page .

 

[Allen]

What does 160 acres of "prime deer land" cost? purchase price? taxes? developing and maintaining feed plots? Does Joe Six Pack have that much money? I suspect if you can make a "hunting quarter" like that, either you have had the land for quite awhile already, you are not Joe Six Pack but "Lawyer Larry", or it was inherited.

Seems like everyone wants the "system" tweaked or not tweaked to benefit themselves. People are greedy, every damn one of them.

Instead of tweaking the system, the G&F needs better info on deer populations and locations. I would love to see mandatory surveys but since people are greedy can the results be trusted? I know it would be prohibitally offensive, but a tag that has a way to "activate" and record time, date, and location when used.... would that help?

I would think you'd be in the $2500 an acre category, because you would want a mix of crop land and cover. So let's look at this very simplistically:

160 x $2500 = $400,000

If I had $400k to put towards hunting, I think I would sink it into a nice bond or "safe" mutual fund seeking 5% annual return.

That $20,000 would go a hell of a long ways in sending me to Canada to hunt a moose in year one while leaving me with enough coin to probably do an Outerbanks tuna charter, or two.

In year two, I'd go hunt sheep in Alaska and find this guy named Frosty and kick his ass for making me so jealous over the years. I'd probably have to bring some help, so there goes the rest of my $20k in year two.

In year three, after healing up from the Alaska trip, I'm going to Texas on a trophy WT/pig excursion. I may even rent a helicopter!

My point here is that buying enough land for just the gratis tag is a really, really poor way to spend your money. I know I am always on the lookout for something like that and when I do see it, I just can't make the numbers pencil out.

 

[dust in the wind]

Can it be used statewide for archery, unit/sex specific for rifle and then also be used in muzzleloader if so desired?

The plan obiwan and others are pushing for is NOT this!

An FYI on this - the G&F will not consider this as a valid option at least as of the time it was being discussed.

 

[Bfishn]

These numbers are hypothetical but It was from a G&F article which I believe it was Williams who stated the proposal would add 10,000 to 12,000 more license in the hands of hunters by reducing the number of bow tags that would be given out.

Also the 10 & 10 were used by bckhntr post 148 and KJS-ND post 179

Here is the problem i see with those numbers. lets say you take away 10,000 bow tags and give them to rifle hunters. They can't just be a 1 for 1 exchange becasue rifle success is historically double what bow is. So if you eliminated half the bow hunters 10,000, you could only give 5,000 rifle tags for the same impact on the deer population.

Now considering bow hunters spend 10 days in the field for half the success of rifle hunters who spend 4 days. Please tell me how taking 10,000 tags away from guys who spend 10 days in the field to give them to 5,000 guys who spend 4 days in the field is somehow a net opportunity gain? Also please explain how a 5,000 net loss in tags is somehow going to add "10,000 to 12,000 more license in the hands of hunters" as you state above??

The reality is anybody who thinks adding rifle tags is some how an opportunity gain is delusional. To add rifle tags you have to take away an even larger opportunity from somebody else. More tags for higher success rate weapon is ass backwards thinking if the goal is more opportunity for hunters in a state with limited deer numbers.

The more rifle tags you give, the fewer tags overall can be given to hunters. This can not be argued for even one second.

 

[espringers]

that there ^^^^ is a well thought out response.

 

[Obi-Wan]

Can it be used statewide for archery, unit/sex specific for rifle and then also be used in muzzleloader if so desired?

The plan discussed was NOT this!

Not state wide ( unless bow only tag over the counter ) or not for muzzy

The way I understood the plan is if you applied in the lottery you would state if you wanted rifle or muzzy and if your name was drawn and your preferred weapon was available you would be successful for that weapon. I could be wrong but I believe those who received a rifle tag could fill that tag with a bow anytime during the bow season but would be limited to the unit, species, and sex on the tag. Those who were unsuccessful would have the option to purchase a state wide bow tag. Those that received a muzzy tag would only be able to hunt the muzzy season. The way I see it the proposal gave nearly everything they could to bow hunters accept 2 tags.

 

[BBQBluesMan]

If anything the option to purchase a preference point for those that want to sit out a year and hunt out of state or for other reasons (no time, family, building a house, etc etc.) should be explored.

I have no sympathy for those that draw a tag and only have a weekend or a day to go out hunting and don't fill a tag but want one every year. If you put in for a tag and make zero attempt to take some time off and put in some effort and don't fill a tag, shoot a dink, or God forbid try hunting a different unit where your draw odds are better, try knitting (sarcasm) or sit out a year if you know you don't have time. I know, life happens and sometimes things just don't work in a given year for unforeseen circumstances, but I know several people who hardly make an attempt to hunt, don't fill tags or complain they didn't see anything opening day, but want tags every year. You have to put in the effort and may have try different units. Opportunities are there. In the hay day a lot of people got spoiled on getting a buck tag every year or other year with multiple doe tags to boot. Those days are likely never coming back (landowner/public tolerance, habitat, etc.)

 

[yellowlab]

If anything the option to purchase a preference point for those that want to sit out a year and hunt out of state or for other reasons (no time, family, building a house, etc etc.) should be explored.

I have no sympathy for those that draw a tag and only have a weekend or a day to go out hunting and don't fill a tag but want one every year. If you put in for a tag and make zero attempt to take some time off and put in some effort and don't fill a tag or God forbid try hunting a different unit where your draw odds are better, try knitting. I know, life happens and sometimes things just don't work in a given year for unforeseen circumstances, but I know several people who hardly make an attempt to hunt, don't fill tags or complain they didn't see anything opening day, but want tags every year. You have to put in the effort and may have try different units. Opportunities are there.

Consider it done. You are welcome.

20.1-03-11.5. Purchase of bonus points awarded for lotteries.1. When an application for a license issued by a lottery that accrues bonus points ismade by an eligible resident with the intent to forfeit the opportunity to receive thatlicense, the director shall limit that applicant to the purchase of one bonus point for thatyear for that lottery. The applicant shall pay the same fee as the respective license.2. The director shall allocate fees collected under subsection 1 to the private lands opento sportsmen program.

 

[dust in the wind]

Not state wide ( unless bow only tag over the counter ) or not for muzzy

The way I understood the plan is if you applied in the lottery you would state if you wanted rifle or muzzy and if your name was drawn and your preferred weapon was available you would be successful for that weapon. I could be wrong but I believe those who received a rifle tag could fill that tag with a bow anytime during the bow season but would be limited to the unit, species, and sex on the tag. Those who were unsuccessful would have the option to purchase a state wide bow tag. Those that received a muzzy tag would only be able to hunt the muzzy season. The way I see it the proposal gave nearly everything they could to bow hunters accept 2 tags.

Basically it forces the bow hunter to either give up rifle and muzzleloader or give up the option hunt statewide with the bow. That is a huge option for bow hunters to give up to be honest.

Yep, I already know that it forces the person drawn to make a decision if they want to use it for rifle or muzzleloader (user preference). This can be a plus or a minus depending on who you ask.

Plus it also means that if a person selected muzzleloader, they weren't able to bow hunt or rifle hunt.

Again, all I see are opportunities removed! and for what reason - a social reason!