MT proposed season changes

[sweetnectar]

If you currently participate in the bonus point system then you should oppose squaring the bonus points. Here is why: You will draw with the same amount of times in your lifetime regardless if the points are squared if no new people participate in the bonus point system. However, when you square the bonus points you square the incentive to purchase points or disincentive if you don't purchase points. Therefore those who don't usually buy bonus points now purchase points. So your odds of drawing more tags over you lifetime actually decrease because more people will now buy bonus points to compete against you.

So squaring bonus points which squares the incentive to purchase points decreases your odds if you currently purchase points and increases revenue for FWP from the points system. Do you really want to square points? My guess is most people on this forum don't.

 

[tjones]

Boy I wish I would have been there to hear something good coming from the MBA. Most of the meetings I have been to that the MBA spoke,,,and I have been to a lot of them, it was all about bow hunter opportunity. Seems they only oppose losing opportunity and only support more opportunity.

 

[mtmiller]

Therefore those who don't usually buy bonus points now purchase points. So your odds of drawing more tags over you lifetime actually decrease because more people will now buy bonus points to compete against you.

I don't care for the squaring of points, but not for your reason. Are there R's that do not purchase points? It's $2. Also, you have to apply to get a point. It is not like some states where you can just purchase the point.

Looking forward the meeting in Havre next week.....gotta look forward to something when it is a balmy -33F outside.

 

[Lawnboy]

Boy I wish I would have been there to hear something good coming from the MBA. Most of the meetings I have been to that the MBA spoke,,,and I have been to a lot of them, it was all about bow hunter opportunity. Seems they only oppose losing opportunity and only support more opportunity.

One of the points that the MBA rep made was the same thing bellydeep mentioned. He had calculated out over the last few years the number of Nr permits given in the late Gardiner hunt. Using that as the example if they moved that Nr date up they were guaranteed to get the full 10% alloted every year. Were as in the years he used as an example they didn't get that 10% and that allowed a few more resident tags. Seems he had really done some homework and that this really had nothing to do with bow hunting just with resident opportunity.

 

[Drake4]

Yeah, I think that was the best point made all night. I don't think many people realized the effects the early non-res drawing would have on the 10% allotment of tags, until this point was brought up.

I also enjoyed the "it's social not biological" argument.

 

[Drake4]

For those of you that stuck around until the end, the discussion on moose was pretty interesting as well. Dire straights for some of the moose herds around here..
I can atest to this after hunting the northern canyon/Spanish Peaks unit hard this fall for moose.

 

[BuzzH]

You want my opinion on the NR draw, it shoud be a guaranteed 10%, that isnt shit when it comes to total tags for all species.

You're crying over nothing, or in some cases, crying over 0.5% better draw odds, or 1-2 tags, in a select few areas that have the worst draw odds in the state. Also, look at the drawings statistics over the last 10 years, the 10% cap is always met on most hard to draw areas and species (moose, goat, sheep, breaks elk, etc.)

Wyoming gives NR hunters a guranteed 25% of all permits...moose, sheep, goat, deer, elk, antelope. That may be a bit high, but its also extremely fair as NR fees are much higher. Also, in some areas NR do have much better draw odds than Residents, but again...look at the difference in tag prices, they're paying big for slightly better draw odds. Its a great deal for the NR's and its also a big boost in funding for the WYG&F, and certainly nothign that a WY resident should go upset over. I sure dont.

With Montana having the cheapest resident tag prices, the NR's should be guaranteed 10% based strictly on a funding issue. I just dont think a guaranteed 10% of tags is out of line in any way.

 

[belly-deep]

You want my opinion on the NR draw, it shoud be a guaranteed 10%, that isnt shit when it comes to total tags for all species.

You're crying over nothing, or in some cases, crying over 0.5% better draw odds, or 1-2 tags, in a select few areas that have the worst draw odds in the state. Also, look at the drawings statistics over the last 10 years, the 10% cap is always met on most hard to draw areas and species (moose, goat, sheep, breaks elk, etc.)

Wyoming gives NR hunters a guranteed 25% of all permits...moose, sheep, goat, deer, elk, antelope. That may be a bit high, but its also extremely fair as NR fees are much higher. Also, in some areas NR do have much better draw odds than Residents, but again...look at the difference in tag prices, they're paying big for slightly better draw odds. Its a great deal for the NR's and its also a big boost in funding for the WYG&F, and certainly nothign that a WY resident should go upset over. I sure dont.

With Montana having the cheapest resident tag prices, the NR's should be guaranteed 10% based strictly on a funding issue. I just dont think a guaranteed 10% of tags is out of line in any way.

Yes but in Wyoming things are a little different. If a NR didn't get a tag, they don't get to hunt....AT ALL.

Here in MT, if you're putting in for a LE tag, then it means you already have a deer or an elk tag for general units...JUST LIKE ALL OF THE RESIDENTS

And then you throw in for a LE tag and, unless the NR quota is met very early in the draw, you are in the same pool as the residents and HAVE THE SAME DRAW ODDS AS THEM TOO.

So everything seems pretty fair the way it is. You mention moose sheep goat..this is for deer and either sex elk only that they are talking about this.

 

[BuzzH]

Belly-deep,

You can spare the condescending bullshit...I was born in Montana and lived there for 30 years, and just finished my 29th straight hunting season there...well aware of the way the system works.

Also fully aware that in fairness, a guaranteed 10% is the right thing to do in regards to NR's.

Beings how NR's face tough draw odds even getting their deer combo, elk combo, or elk/deer combo licenses, it seems intuitively obvious they should not be in a drawing system that can potentially leave them ZERO chance at a premium permit.

Use say a 270 Bitterroot deer tag for an example. A NR has about 30% odds of drawing the deer only license. So, that means over a 10 year stretch I'll have a deer tag 3 years. So, in that 10 years, I'll only even be in the draw for a 270 deer tag 3 times...a resident 10 times.

On top of that, if the first 50 names picked in the 3 years I can even apply are all residents...guess what my draw odds were ZERO.

At least with a guaranteed 5 tags, the 3 out of 10 years I held the deer combo I would at least have a guaranteed chance at a tag.

So, no, things arent even close to fair if you think past being flat selfish.

Oh, and sheep, moose, and goat should be guaranteed 10% for NR as well.

 

[smalls]

DON'T TELL BUZZ HOW THIS STATE WORKS GDI! BUZZ F*ING GREETED MERIWETHER LEWIS WHEN HE GOT TO MONTANA!!!

Not to disagree with you Buzz (okay, to disagree with you), but if 50 resident names are drawn prior to a NR name is drawn it hasn't effected the "odds" of you drawing that tag. Every time you fail to draw a tag in a district, it doesn't mean that your "odds" were 0%. When a NR gets a general tag, I think their odds should be the same as the whole pool of LE applicants. I also believe that all resident licenses should become slightly more expensive to reduce the dependency on NR funding.

Not that it really matters, most will go their whole lives applying for 270 deer and 380 elk and never draw.

Fire away...

 

[BuzzH]

smalls,

How do you figure I have the same draw odds of drawing 270 when I cant even apply for 7/10 years I dont have a NR deer tag?

Yes, it does effect my odds when Resident applications out number nonresident by several thousand applications. The only statistical way my odds would be the same is if there was no cap of 10%.

I dont really think its worth a residents time to get all knotted up over 10% of the tags out there...I really dont. But, you certainly can disagree, I dont live there anymore and I've taken my full share of game out of Montana...minus a sheep tag...would like to get one of those.

Oh, and my family didnt meet Lewis and Clark, but my great grandfather was living in Montana around 1890. My Grandfather was born in Montana in 1916.

 

[tjones]

Things keep going the way they are headed you won't want a 270 buck tag!

 

[BuzzH]

tjones,

Dont want one, just using it as an example.

That said, I think you're right about that particular tag

Not what it once was for sure.

 

[Oak]

Things keep going the way they are headed you won't want a 270 buck tag!

I couldn't find a single compelling LE tag to apply for after drawing my deer combo tag this year, so I didn't even apply.

 

[belly-deep]

Buzz,

I'll happily spare you the condescending bullshit if you'll spare me the "I'm an out of stater and I'm entitled to more than I get bullshit".

If you want to get a tag for 270, move back to Montana and quit your whining. Or stay in Wyoming, put in some effort (complaining with your keyboard is not considered effort) and hunt in G and H.

Even with improved draw odds, you still stand a poor chance of drawing 270. On the other hand, you could kill 3-4 bucks in G and H in a 10 year period that would be as good or better than anything you'd kill in 270.

As far as what these changes would screw up for the draws, I'm not worried about units like 270. Its the medium quality draw odds that will get turned on their heads with the proposed changes.

But back to 270. Your draw odds could actually go down with the changes...cruch the numbers for yourself.

 

[The Hedgehog]

belly deep, G & H in Wyoming are general for Wyoming residents and Buzz has hunted them, and he can every season without a draw.. He passed up a chance at a 190+ buck and encouraged me to hike over and shoot it. Yeah, he's a bad guy, whining non-resident. Allowing non-residents to have 10%, instead of "up to 10%" isn't that big of a deal.

As is, non-residents cannot even acquire a deer or elk permit preference point unless they draw the deer or deer/elk licences initially before the permit draw. I think that's what Buzz is trying to explain for you.

But it doesn't really matter because my kids will shoot the big ones the Thursday before season, before you and Buzz even get a chance.

 

[BuzzH]

belly-deep,

I dont think my attitude is one of entitlement to anything, but rather on a fair drawing process for a group of people that fund a vast majority of the FWP budget each year.

If you want to talk about entitlement and you're worried about 10% guarantee of tags to NR in Montanas draw...you really are clueless. If you want to bitch about entitlement you should maybe check into landowner preference...you'll learn the true definition of entitlement. Thats a much bigger fish than a few guaranteed NR permits...and that isnt even debateable.

But, on to the 270 deer permit example for clarification on this discussion.

First off...the draw odds for 270 for both resident and non-resident landowners were 100% and they took 15 of the 100 available tags. So, that right there is 15% of the available tags going to a select group...and I havent heard a peep from you about that situation. Clearly, no entitlement there.

So, now we're down to 85 remaining tags. There were 5,376 residents that applied and 672 non-residents. According to you, with this "fair" system that you're "pretty sure is about the same as a guaranteed 10%"...the NR's should have drawn 8 permits (not withstanding the 15 landowner tags and rounding down). Funny thing though, they only drew 3, while residents drew 82.

So, lets do some math shall we?

Whats 3/672 x100? the NR draw odds for a 270 tag were .4 percent...dont miss that small dot in front of the 4.

Resident odds: 82/5376x100 give you 1.5 percent odds nearly 3x as good a chance.

If NR's were given 8 permits (again rounding down after the 15 landowner tags) the draw odds would be 8/672x100 which would be: 1.2 percent odds. Nearly an equal chance, but not quite.

I've looked at several other areas with similar results.

Like I said before, dont forget that in any ten straight years, a NR, by the odds, will only have a tag 3 times.

So, we done here or do you need a few more examples of Montanas fairness in dealing with a group that funds a majority of the FWP?

Also, check the breaks elk odds and see how close to 10% NR's come to drawing there...for a real eye opener try unit 380-20 for elk...110 elk permits and NR's drew 3.

Yep, its "pretty close"...good grief.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Buzz,
But back to 270. Your draw odds could actually go down with the changes...cruch the numbers for yourself.

He'd get a preference point every year.. and there'd be more tags guarenteed to non-residents. How would his draw odds go down?

 

[The Hedgehog]

Here's the mule deer that Buzz.. the nasty non-resident prick that he, encouraged me to go shoot. We were a wilderness area and Buzz was signed off as my resident guide. This is an area he can hunt annually, but he won't because I showed him the place. Even though he's a resident and can hunt this place every year over the counter, and I have to draw and only go every 3 years or so... he won't do it because that's the kind of guy he is. He doesn't even ask...

I say give Buzz a Montana 270 permit and shut the hell up!

 

[BuzzH]

Greenhorn,

I think I may have cleared up the math...now we'll see how well the Flathead Valley public school system handled comprehension...obviously math wasnt a shining star.