MAJOR PROP. PASSED, SR RAC
HUNTIN FOR LIFE
11/5/08 9:05am
This is the new changes that passed at last nights RAC. even though every one of the public comment, or questions were against the change they still voted for it.
If this proposal goes through the other 4 RAC meeting it will result in your kids not being able to hunt a LE hunt ever.
1. Do away with group applications for limited entry elk, deer or pronghorn permits;
2. Continue to allow hunters to apply for only one limited entry species and one once-in-a-lifetime species, but let them also apply for bonus points for other species.
The DWR posted a statistic at the RAC asking showing the top 5 reasons that hunters want to draw tag. All 5 reasons were based around a social, family and friends. Not because they wanted to kill a big buck or bull. So my issues is why would they pass a proposal that WILL NOT allow you to put in as a group.
The second proposal that pass i my mind is absolutely insane. Utah has one of the best point systems out, to give someone at lease an opportunity to draw a LE tag if they put in long enough. The proposal that passed will not. If you allow everyone to by a bonus point for every species they want, eventually that will cause everyone to have so many points, that it will be nearly impossible for our kids to ever have a chance at drawing a LE quality tag.
I am trying to put together some statistic that will show the odds of drawing a tag in 15 years if they allow people to buy a point for every species.
One thing i found a little surprising is the low number of people that were at the Southern RAC meeting last night, and i know the elections were yesterday and people were voting but there were some major changes made last night and there were maybe only 40 people there to voice there opinion. We need more people to come out to the RAC meeting if we don't it might be to late in a couple years do anything. I just hope that anyone that is going to the other 4 RAC meeting really pays attention to the Bonus Point proposal. It wont effect use that put in for tags now but it will effect youth and the opportunity they will have in 15+ years.
If this proposal goes through the other 4 RAC meeting it will result in your kids not being able to hunt a LE hunt ever.
1. Do away with group applications for limited entry elk, deer or pronghorn permits;
2. Continue to allow hunters to apply for only one limited entry species and one once-in-a-lifetime species, but let them also apply for bonus points for other species.
The DWR posted a statistic at the RAC asking showing the top 5 reasons that hunters want to draw tag. All 5 reasons were based around a social, family and friends. Not because they wanted to kill a big buck or bull. So my issues is why would they pass a proposal that WILL NOT allow you to put in as a group.
The second proposal that pass i my mind is absolutely insane. Utah has one of the best point systems out, to give someone at lease an opportunity to draw a LE tag if they put in long enough. The proposal that passed will not. If you allow everyone to by a bonus point for every species they want, eventually that will cause everyone to have so many points, that it will be nearly impossible for our kids to ever have a chance at drawing a LE quality tag.
I am trying to put together some statistic that will show the odds of drawing a tag in 15 years if they allow people to buy a point for every species.
One thing i found a little surprising is the low number of people that were at the Southern RAC meeting last night, and i know the elections were yesterday and people were voting but there were some major changes made last night and there were maybe only 40 people there to voice there opinion. We need more people to come out to the RAC meeting if we don't it might be to late in a couple years do anything. I just hope that anyone that is going to the other 4 RAC meeting really pays attention to the Bonus Point proposal. It wont effect use that put in for tags now but it will effect youth and the opportunity they will have in 15+ years.
7,873
I for one support the getting rid of the group LE applications.
But I do not like the idea of letting people applie for other bonuse points.
The reason I would be okay with them geting rid of the group applications is that it would do away with people with lots of points putting in with those that have few or no points and increasing their chance of a tag, and then when the tags are drawn turning there tag in the lower point person keeps his tag and the higher point tag get a point for that year. This is what I have a problem with. Now if there is another option that would eliiminate this than I am all ears.
Maybe they should make it so that if one turns the tag in then all turn there tags in, in the group. I just don't like them useing there points in this maner. I am not agains the group tags so to say, I am agains the higher point holders using there points and then turning the tag in and still geting a point back. But like I say I am all ears to other ideas that would get rid of this problem.
My suggestion to eliminate that problem is to only allow a person to turn their tag back in 1 or 2 times what ever is decided. but after that they will ether have to use there tag or loose all their point. there was actually a
RAC board member that suggested that to be one of the changes in this issue but another board member shot it down.
What your thoughts about that suggestion
Was anything decided down there on the spike elk tag increase. This is another one that I think is a very bad idea, you don't get big bulls just automaticaly being born, they have to be a spike at one time inther life. Let the spikes grow and offer more branch antler tags. But don't kill off the future big bulls by increasing spike tags. I realy don't see what that is going to accomplish.
I do see your points however and they are good.
Group applications DO HURT odds and I think that is one of the main reasons for getting rid of them.
The downside is that you may not have your whole family with a tag or friends. I don't see this as a huge problem, but will agree it will bother some and upset them. My family usually will tag along for the hunt, or as many as can even if we only have 1 tag. I know I do because I like getting out.
But I will admit, it's funner to have friends/parents/brothers etc. having a tag also. But most use it to play the odds in there favor by putting in with someone with HIGH points, which hurts the odds for everyone else IMO.
As for the Points for all species, I know this is getting bashed by a lot of people and I'm not so sure I see all the negativity. I personally would like to try the idea for a few years and see REALLY how much worse the odds will get. If it's not a big deal, then keep it and good idea. If it's a MESS, then drop it.
What is/was there reason for allowing this in the first place? Did they say at the RAC?
I would assume, partially again to make more money. But if they are charged a fair amount of cash, which I'm not saying is a good idea; how many people would realistically dump a bunch more money in for point??
Just some thoughts and ideas, I've been known to change my view if someone can show me a clearer picture. :)
Personally I think we should get rid of bonus points all together and that's coming from a guy who should draw his Utah Elk Tag in the next couple of years. I think our limited entry units are too limited. I think the vast majority of our Elk should be available to the general public. To keep all of them from getting killed off, limit the number of rifle hunters and move the rifle hunt out of the rut. Make the majority of tags available to short range weapons. Just My 02
The problem is not with group applications but with being able to turn a tag back in and still gain a point. The easiest solution is already being used in several other states. Don't allow people to turn a tag back in unless there is an extreme reason for it (i.e. military being deployed). In addition, if you do turn a tag back in you should not gain a point for that year.
As far as points for every species: Most average hunters complain about the expense involved in hunting. "It's becoming a rich mans sport." This is a perfect example of that. If everyone buys a point for every species then no ones odds increase, but we're all a little poorer. It does nothing positive for you and me. Everyone thinks that if we keep raising the prices that things will get better for those of us who "are really into hunting" because some people will drop out of the game. All we need to do is look in the past and realize that this rarely happens. Last year Utah made you purchase a hunting license first, but odds didn't improve at all (prices increase and odds stay the same or get worse). When they added points in Wyoming more people put in because everyone feels if they don't they'll get way behind (prices increase and odds stay the same or get worse). Who wins?
The people that this will absolutely hurt are the youth who can't buy points yet. Once they're of age they will be so far behind it may not be worth trying.
They need to either open it up for everyone to apply for everything (which still hurts odds), or leave it the way it is and make people pick their poison.
That's all this does for youth is makes it harder for them. Now they are not only behind those that are older, if they or there family can't afford to buy points for them they are behind everyone else who can. This is a horrible idea.
This is just another way that if you can 'afford' it then you have more opportunity. Now just the chance to hunt is getting expesive. It's to the point that you would be better off just saving your money and buying OIL tag.
I agree, the drop applying as a group helps some and hurts some, but the guy that just drew the tag a couple of years ago and now has a couple of points puts in with his brother who has lets say 9 points it increases odds for 2 and not 1. While the guy who is applying by himself may not get 1 tag before the other gets 2 tags. Fair? not really, then heck he could go to another buddy and convince him to let him apply with him also.
I guess it's 'sixes' either way, so again does anyone know the real reason behind the move??
I hate the... here is the plan/proposal without the reasons behind it.
I guess either way we/you look at it the odds aren't good and likely only getting worse? I guess I'm not smart enough to come up with a better solution. :)
Right?
I think you are absoultely right on this one.
By the way from my perspective there was a good number of people that showed up to the Southern RAC. Especially when you consider that that there were at least 5 leaders of orginizations that showed up to represent themseleves and their respective groups ie UBA, SFW, Disabled hunters, BOU etc.... The fact that the voices were so admitally against some of the the DWR proposals like state wide spike hunting and state wide archery and nothing was done about it was frustating but it sounds like the other RAC's are working that out. Hopefully the board listens to what seems to be good reason from the other RAC's.
Like the gentlemen that represented the disabled hunters said, "It won't happen if you don't ask". People who don't show up to these meetings or work for what they think is right shouldn't complain about where things are or where they are going.
I was disappointed by the lack of response from the southern RAC board. They didn't address a single proposal made by the public, not even the great one from the mobile impaired group. UBA made 3 proposals, we put lot of work into them, one was directed at creating more opportunity for youth hunters, the RAC simply recommended they be dealt with at the Wildlife Board, basically passing the buck. They then passed EVERYTHING the DWR recommended, even after the majority of the public AND RAC members voiced concern/opposition to many of them.
At least the southeastern and northeastern RAC's addressed some of the issues, and discussed many of the proposals, what a concept. There are two RAC's left, the Northern and the Central, show up and voice your stance. I was disappointed in the number in attendance at the southern, if you took away the DWR employees and the RAC board/wildlife board, there were less than 40 people there, with several of us coming from other parts of the state.
people need to start coming out to the meetings. it shows that rac board that there is still people that care.