Creative solution for increasing numbers of nonresident applications

[7Bartman]

I was thinking today since I didn't get an Idaho NR tag this year (randomization had me at almost 16k in the queue). I figured since I'd rather have some type of opportunity, what about the following:

Archery season would be broken down into two mini-seasons Sept 1-15th and 15-30th, each with their own separate distinct tags. You can only hold one tag. While most nonresidents would probably opt for the 15th-30th, those of us who aren't selected would be happy with the 1st-15th.
By altering the season this way would double the amount of opportunity and tags sold. Besides, many nonresidents only hunt 7-10 days anyways. I know I'd rather hunt the 1-15th then not hunt at all.
Pros: Double the amount of opportunity for nonresidents and double the amount of elk tags sold by the dept.
Cons: Likely some increased harvest of elk, albeit minimal considering limited success rates of OTC archery. Some intangible increase in pressure.

 

[realunlucky]

Giving this a thumbs down. The numbers of non resident tags is set by the over all harvest goals determined by herd number objectives.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Catag94]

You sure it would double sales/opportunities? I would imagine they sell the same number of licenses either way based on quotas for harvest using success percentages etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[7Bartman]

You sure it would double sales/opportunities? I would imagine they sell the same number of licenses either way based on quotas for harvest using success percentages etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it would. They had way more NR hunters looking for tags then they had tags available. Even if it's 1.5 that's still a win. Again, with the low harvest stats for the first 2 weeks of archery I don't think this would adversely impact herd numbers.

 

[bluetick78]

I'm not convinced that selling 2x the amount of tags for NR is in Idaho's future.....

 

[Chad E]

I think your missing lots of parts of the overall equation. For instance....doubling tags doubles pressure on the herd any way you slice it. I don't think those 15th through the 30th tags would be as desirable if that many guys are chasing them the 1st through the 15th those elk would be chased 2x as hard in the month of September. More elk would get harvested no matter how you look at it and that goes against current harvest targets.
I feel for you not getting your tag but simply doubling tags isn't the answer. It's some serious flawed logic to determine because there's more intrested hunters than tags that the solution is to sell more tags.
There are places/states/seasons where splitting into multiple seasons makes sense to spread out pressure but doubling the tags available negates the benefits gained.

 

[Customweld]

I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see us go to a full draw for NR’s. The system we have right now is a mess.

 

[Catag94]

I think it would. They had way more NR hunters looking for tags then they had tags available. Even if it's 1.5 that's still a win. Again, with the low harvest stats for the first 2 weeks of archery I don't think this would adversely impact herd numbers.

However, I’m guessing they don’t want to sell more tags than what they already offer for NR for the season. They are managing a herd and probably came to that number based on hers management metrics. I’m sure they know that a specific hunter may have a tag for the whole season but only hunt x number of days. Multiplying that times any number above 1 would
dramatically change their expected harvest and therefore their management plan. In fact, keeping the total number of
Tags the same but multiplying the number of hunters by 2 would have a drastic effect because as is, the average hunter may spends x days hunting and has an average success rate of y. You double the hunters and x goes up considerably for the month (remember, if it stay the same per hunter, it doubles for the whole season). Success rate may not differ much but now it’s times twice the hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[7Bartman]

I think your missing lots of parts of the overall equation. For instance....doubling tags doubles pressure on the herd any way you slice it. I don't think those 15th through the 30th tags would be as desirable if that many guys are chasing them the 1st through the 15th those elk would be chased 2x as hard in the month of September. More elk would get harvested no matter how you look at it and that goes against current harvest targets.
I feel for you not getting your tag but simply doubling tags isn't the answer.

Agreed, that it does double pressure, but I'm pretty sure those guys that had the 15th-30th would still be elated to hunt. More elk would definitely get harvested, but I argue with the low success rates, it wouldn't significantly impact the harvest statistics.

 

[7Bartman]

For instance lets say the OTC archery success rate is at 10%. I don't think that doubling the numbers of NR archery hunters would significantly impact the harvest statistics. Just looking at the harvest statistics it seems like way more elk are taken outside of archery season by an order of magnitude.

 

[Catag94]

For instance lets say the OTC archery success rate is at 10%. I don't think that doubling the numbers of NR archery hunters would significantly impact the harvest statistics. Just looking at the harvest statistics it seems like way more elk are taken outside of archery season by an order of magnitude.

How many days would you hunt had you drawn this year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Billy Goat]

There's only 20k elk killed in Idaho every year, and a large percentage are on controlled hunts.

Its not going to take a big change to tag numbers to make a fair change in harvest percentage.

 

[npm352]

I don't think that just doubling the NR elk quotas is the solution.

 

[Laramie]

The demand far exceeds the supply... Adding more hunters does not solve this problem.

 

[JeffRaines]

I think you’re thinking in the right direction - save for doubling the tag quota.

Maybe break out the season into 2-3 mini seasons similar to how Colorado does rifle seasons. Don’t change the tag quota, just split the quota up between the seasons. It’ll be less pressure at any given time in the woods because only so many people will have said tag.

The only downfall to this plan is that a lot of IDs problem isn’t NR(although they absolutely contribute) but the MASSIVE increase in residents. Go look at how fast people are moving to Idaho!

 

[BRTreedogs]

I say just make the tag $2500

 

[Catag94]

Same number of tags held by twice as many hunter WILL definitely increase pressure, and harvest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rob5589]

Nope. Do you really want the same number of hunters in a 2 week period that you have over the entire month as currently set? Heck no. Plus, tags are a set number of 12800 (iirc) and can only be changed through the commission, which won't happen and even if proposed, would be heavily opposed by residents. Breaking up the season, I believe, is a good idea. Again, it would spread out hunters like the newest tag allocations did. And just fyi, you can still but elk tags today if you'd like.

 

[7Bartman]

How many days would you hunt had you drawn this year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I typically hunt 7 days. I think this is near average for most NR.

Nope. Do you really want the same number of hunters in a 2 week period that you have over the entire month as currently set? Heck no. Plus, tags are a set number of 12800 (iirc) and can only be changed through the commission, which won't happen and even if proposed, would be heavily opposed by residents. Breaking up the season, I believe, is a good idea. Again, it would spread out hunters like the newest tag allocations did. And just fyi, you can still but elk tags today if you'd like.

As it currently stands most hunters hunt weeks 2-3 anyways. With the current allocations I don't think it be over pressured. Heck, this September was the least amount of hunters I've ever seen in the units I hunt.

 

[Jethro]

The numbers of non resident tags is set by the over all harvest goals determined by herd number objectives.

^^^Has to be this way. We can’t double tag quotas just because somebody doesn’t get the tag they want.