CO 2023 Estimated Harvest is up

[cuerro viejo]

Once all states go to electronic HL data will become actually accurate.

NM, TX, Okla, etc are starting to get better data.

 

[Indian Summer]

Yes… and the economy is doing just great!

 

[RCB]

I'm surprised at how the predominate opinion here seems to be something like...
1. People lie on their reports, so they cannot be trusted
2. We should mandate reporting
Maybe I'm not understanding the argument.

 

[Crowmangler]

I'm surprised at how the predominate opinion here seems to be something like...
1. People lie on their reports, so they cannot be trusted
2. We should mandate reporting
Maybe I'm not understanding the argument.

Scenario 1: You kill a bull & tell a little old lady over the phone you didn't kill one & she checks a box.

Scenario 2: You kill a bull & on the mandatory reporting system you say you didn't kill one. The wildlife officer rolls in a week later & confirms that you actually did kill one. He then issues you a fine & confiscates your meat & head because you lied. He also says you can't get another tag for 5 years.

Which scenario do you think would inspire a hunter to report their result more truthfully?

 

[RCB]

Scenario 1: You kill a bull & tell a little old lady over the phone you didn't kill one & she checks a box.

Scenario 2: You kill a bull & on the mandatory reporting system you say you didn't kill one. The wildlife officer rolls in a week later & confirms that you actually did kill one. He then issues you a fine & confiscates your meat & head because you lied. He also says you can't get another tag for 5 years.

Which scenario do you think would inspire a hunter to report their result more truthfully?

Maybe I don’t understand how mandatory reporting would work. Where does this wildlife officer go to confirm that you killed (or didn’t kill) an elk? Your house? Does he get to search your premises on the grounds that you *might* have lied?

 

[Crowmangler]

Maybe I don’t understand how mandatory reporting would work. Where does this wildlife officer go to confirm that you killed (or didn’t kill) an elk? Your house? Does he get to search your premises on the grounds that you *might* have lied?

I don't have all the answers to all hypotheticals but just throwing this example out there... you legally kill a bull, legally punch the tag but report that you did not kill anything. CPW does a check of the local taxidermy shop (normal for them to do this, at least here in NC) & cross references the harvest report. He sees you lied on the harvest report & you get fined, etc.

As I stated earlier... I don't think this SHOULD be put into place but it COULD easily be done if they wanted to get accurate harvest reports.

 

[RCB]

I don't have all the answers to all hypotheticals but just throwing this example out there... you legally kill a bull, legally punch the tag but report that you did not kill anything. CPW does a check of the local taxidermy shop (normal for them to do this, at least here in NC) & cross references the harvest report. He sees you lied on the harvest report & you get fined, etc.

As I stated earlier... I don't think this SHOULD be put into place but it COULD easily be done if they wanted to get accurate harvest reports.

I’m skeptical. I mean, the majority of hunters report that they did not get an elk right? Something like 80%? Is CPW going to spend all the money to do the detective work on *every one* of those to make sure they did not in fact get an elk? That seems like a massive undertaking. What about the tens of thousands of nonresidents, for that matter?
Not to mention potential constitutional issues. “Responding to a survey” doesn’t constitute probable cause for some wildlife officer to come search your place for meat.
I could see them making some efforts to check honesty in some cases, of the kind you mentioned. But not a full blown 100% mandatory check-in for every hunter.

 

[Crowmangler]

I’m skeptical. I mean, the majority of hunters report that they did not get an elk right? Something like 80%? Is CPW going to spend all the money to do the detective work on *every one* of those to make sure they did not in fact get an elk? That seems like a massive undertaking. What about the tens of thousands of nonresidents, for that matter?
Not to mention potential constitutional issues. “Responding to a survey” doesn’t constitute probable cause for some wildlife officer to come search your place for meat.
I could see them making some efforts to check honesty in some cases, of the kind you mentioned. But not a full blown 100% mandatory check-in for every hunter.

I don't think anyone is suggesting actually checking that many people like in the example above. The discussion was originally about having an app or a phone # that everyone could self report easily in about 30 seconds.
I'm done with this conversation

 

[Felix40]

I’m skeptical. I mean, the majority of hunters report that they did not get an elk right? Something like 80%? Is CPW going to spend all the money to do the detective work on *every one* of those to make sure they did not in fact get an elk? That seems like a massive undertaking. What about the tens of thousands of nonresidents, for that matter?
Not to mention potential constitutional issues. “Responding to a survey” doesn’t constitute probable cause for some wildlife officer to come search your place for meat.
I could see them making some efforts to check honesty in some cases, of the kind you mentioned. But not a full blown 100% mandatory check-in for every hunter.

You might be surprised

 

[Ucsdryder]

Scenario 1: You kill a bull & tell a little old lady over the phone you didn't kill one & she checks a box.

Scenario 2: You kill a bull & on the mandatory reporting system you say you didn't kill one. The wildlife officer rolls in a week later & confirms that you actually did kill one. He then issues you a fine & confiscates your meat & head because you lied. He also says you can't get another tag for 5 years.

Which scenario do you think would inspire a hunter to report their result more truthfully?

The threat of legal action is enough to make sure 99% of people self report. If they go to mandatory reporting and a false report leads to loss of privileges the following year I believe the reporting would be very accurate.

 

[Indian Summer]

Maybe I don’t understand how mandatory reporting would work. Where does this wildlife officer go to confirm that you killed (or didn’t kill) an elk? Your house? Does he get to search your premises on the grounds that you *might* have lied?

You’re clueless. Try golf. Well maybe not because you have to fill out a card showing your score. Better skip bowling too. How about cornhole? No paperwork.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Harvest reports are to give another bit of info to be the first to tell everyone about and give a group hard-on the next spring for where folks might apply for a tag and become another non-resident in a western state.

They don't issue tags until they've done the spring survey, which has been going on for decades and decades. Information they need from a management perspective they get from that, not from calling paranoid adult men who fret over telling the person on the phone they got an animal and then spend three pages in a forum discussing lying about it. Lol.

 

[RCB]

You might be surprised

About?

 

[RCB]

I don't think anyone is suggesting actually checking that many people like in the example above. The discussion was originally about having an app or a phone # that everyone could self report easily in about 30 seconds.
I'm done with this conversation

Sure. My thought is just that I don't see how creating an app would solve the supposed problem, which seems to be widely held, that rampant lying causes harvest reports to be useless. The supposed liars would just... not use the app, or lie, right? What would make it more accurate than the current survey process?
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for an app that makes reporting easier. I just don't think it solves the problem that people seem to believe is happening in this thread.

 

[Idaboy]

All this conjecture.....do we really know that,say in mandatory states, that falsification of report is common?, or that routine "investigation" are occurring based on a guys report? My hunting crew has never had any issues with game wardens coming to check us after a report, in the 3 states we've been mandatory reporting in for 25yrs.

 

[Idaboy]

Sure. My thought is just that I don't see how creating an app would solve the supposed problem, which seems to be widely held, that rampant lying causes harvest reports to be useless. The supposed liars would just... not use the app, or lie, right? What would make it more accurate than the current survey process?
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for an app that makes reporting easier. I just don't think it solves the problem that people seem to believe is happening in this thread.

In some states, you can't buy a license the next year, until you update your hunter report (whether you tagged out or not)

 

[brushape]

Estimates…..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mobohunter]

Interesting perspectives here. As a newer western hunter, I do review the data produced from western states to try to better pick which unit to go in, but if the data isnt accurate I guess it isnt a good use of my time... Maybe we should just get out there and hunt

 

[timekiller13]

I think the harvest reports a probably pretty accurate, within a margin of error of 5%.

Why?

Number one, a single person deciding to not be truthful on a survey is meaningless and it’s quite stupid of that person to think that they have any influence. That person would have to be able to manipulate at least 20% of the data to make it meaningful. Even if you hunt with a group (5-10 people) you can’t control that much data.

Second. People like to brag. They like to tell anyone and everyone who will listen about what they killed. It’s a small minority who keep their mouths shut.