Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Just spitballing here. Besides the complexity, cost and time required to put more game in the field, I think there might be a fundamental flaw in attempting to redirect hunters’ attention away from how we slice the pie, and towards making the pie bigger.
If you are of privilege, the total number of huntable animals might not significantly influence your hunting opportunity. If the pie shrinks, you can take opportunity away from the non-privileged in order to keep getting the same amount of pie every year.
If you are not of privilege, let’s say the bottom 90% of hunters by a variety of measures (nonresidents, too young to have got in on the bottom floor for points, LO, income level, etc.), it’s easy to be skeptical that a bigger pie will translate to more personal hunting opportunity due to the history of squandering tactics of the privileged groups.
A practical example: rewind the clock 2-3 decades to when point systems were created. The math for glory tags was known up front - all the people buying tags in the first few years will eventually get glory tags, and nearly all the new point buyers to follow will never get one. Hunting opportunity was intentionally carved away to ensure that the current generation got the best and most at the expense of the next generation getting carved out.
And it’s not just PP, look at when the oldest MT hunters grumbled about not getting their moose and sheep tags. They re-stacked the deck AGAIN by squaring their BP. In several other States outfitters secured tag carve-outs, and NM dumps half their elk to NR’s. WY’s One Shot Antelope “Hunt”, auction tags, governor tags…There are countless other examples.
A lot of hunters, myself included, get incensed by the carveout shenanigans. When the pie is small, can’t we at least divide it up equitably? Shrinking game herds can be the source of angst too, but it doesn’t help that there are dozens of factors influencing why the herd size is the size that it is. Blame gets thrown around to predators, habitat loss, disease, wildfire policy, liberal harvests, etc., but at the end of the day there is no smoking gun. But when MOGA-directed elected representatives slip in an 11th hour provision to a bill that gives every outfitted NR a free elk and deer PP, the culprits are unambiguously clear.
Landing the plane…
If I willfully choose to tune out the endless procession of hunting opportunity carveouts by the privileged, perhaps I can force myself to get more amped up about antelope habitat, etc. than I do about trustees of public resources failing to do their jobs.
If ID moves to a pure PP system, do I get in on the ground floor to secure a sweet tag at the expense of the next generation of hunters? Is it worth the cost of aiding in the future disillusionment of those hunters towards doing what is best for the resource?
If you are of privilege, the total number of huntable animals might not significantly influence your hunting opportunity. If the pie shrinks, you can take opportunity away from the non-privileged in order to keep getting the same amount of pie every year.
If you are not of privilege, let’s say the bottom 90% of hunters by a variety of measures (nonresidents, too young to have got in on the bottom floor for points, LO, income level, etc.), it’s easy to be skeptical that a bigger pie will translate to more personal hunting opportunity due to the history of squandering tactics of the privileged groups.
A practical example: rewind the clock 2-3 decades to when point systems were created. The math for glory tags was known up front - all the people buying tags in the first few years will eventually get glory tags, and nearly all the new point buyers to follow will never get one. Hunting opportunity was intentionally carved away to ensure that the current generation got the best and most at the expense of the next generation getting carved out.
And it’s not just PP, look at when the oldest MT hunters grumbled about not getting their moose and sheep tags. They re-stacked the deck AGAIN by squaring their BP. In several other States outfitters secured tag carve-outs, and NM dumps half their elk to NR’s. WY’s One Shot Antelope “Hunt”, auction tags, governor tags…There are countless other examples.
A lot of hunters, myself included, get incensed by the carveout shenanigans. When the pie is small, can’t we at least divide it up equitably? Shrinking game herds can be the source of angst too, but it doesn’t help that there are dozens of factors influencing why the herd size is the size that it is. Blame gets thrown around to predators, habitat loss, disease, wildfire policy, liberal harvests, etc., but at the end of the day there is no smoking gun. But when MOGA-directed elected representatives slip in an 11th hour provision to a bill that gives every outfitted NR a free elk and deer PP, the culprits are unambiguously clear.
Landing the plane…
If I willfully choose to tune out the endless procession of hunting opportunity carveouts by the privileged, perhaps I can force myself to get more amped up about antelope habitat, etc. than I do about trustees of public resources failing to do their jobs.
If ID moves to a pure PP system, do I get in on the ground floor to secure a sweet tag at the expense of the next generation of hunters? Is it worth the cost of aiding in the future disillusionment of those hunters towards doing what is best for the resource?
