Thanks, Red Rabbit. I've read through the recommendations as well and understand the pie allotment. It is my understanding that the allotments were already set at 30% tags going to archery (per the 5 year cycle). That being the case, I can't find the link between the weapon allocation (pie) formula and the proportionate recommended decrease in archery tags for 2010. If I read the document correctly, they're also recommending an October rifle hunt? IMO, herd objectives will trump the weapon pie allotment in the commission's eyes any day. If archers are already allocated 30% of bull tags, and the success rate is higher than expected (during the rut), herd objectives would dictate a reduction in early archery tags. That's a given. The only way to NOT deflate the overall archery allotment below 30% would be to offer an additional, less successful hunt like the Nov hunts. I don't see this commission EVER decreasing the number of rifle tags to make up for the archery rut's success rates. As terrible as it is, it looks like the number of rut archery tags will go down given their relatively high success rates, and from the beginning, I've seen this Nov archery experiment as a way of reconciling the difference between herd objectives and the weapon allotments. Barring any additional information, I don't subscribe to the theory that the Nov archery hunts were created to shift archers away from the rut. They were created to make up for shortfalls in the archery weapon allotments given the inevitable decrease in early archery tags. We're just too successful during the rut, I'm afraid. I'm not trying to lock horns with anybody here, just presenting my opinion.