More OPPORTUNITY

[Ron G.]

I saw many other units in addtion to all north of the grand canyon that would fall into this category as they proposed. If I remember correctly, I saw units 1, 3A/3C, 7, 12's, 13's, 22, 23, 17A?, 35A, 42? I could be wrong, and there were definitely more units I have left out!

 

Here are the units as I wrote them down last night that will currently be affected (meet the 20%)...

 

Units that will be draw only:

1, 3A/3C, 3B, 7, 12A, 13A, 13B (currently no archery hunt)

 

Units that will be OTC (over the counter) in Aug/Sep and Jan (lose December opportunity):

17A, 20A, 22, 23, 35A

 

Units that will be OTC Jan (lose December opportunity):

37A, 42

 

Ron

[Ron G.]

What do people think about a quota system similar to what is in place for bears? Set a specific harvest goal and once that goal has been reached they close the unit. I can't remember if it would require a rule change or not. Additional systems would have to be put in place, and there would be more severe consequences to those that didn't follow the mandatory harvest reporting. It would have to change from 10 days to 48 hours, as well.

 

One drawback is that units 12, 1, 3A/3C, and others that are pretty crowded would be VERY crowded opening weekend and opening week...

[DesertBull]

When they say it is a "barrier" to hunting, that is G&F speak for "it will cost us a few dollars, so screw that."

[Basser15]

I would prefer to see the quota system more then I would a draw process for the archery units.

[jnobleinaz]

What do people think about a quota system similar to what is in place for bears? Set a specific harvest goal and once that goal has been reached they close the unit. I can't remember if it would require a rule change or not. Additional systems would have to be put in place, and there would be more severe consequences to those that didn't follow the mandatory harvest reporting. It would have to change from 10 days to 48 hours, as well.

 

One drawback is that units 12, 1, 3A/3C, and others that are pretty crowded would be VERY crowded opening weekend and opening week...

The only problem I have with a quota system is that you must bring in antlers with skull attached to be valid for archery. Too many antis would catch on and buy tags and call in kills to shut units down. I know they do this we have some customers that have a group that puts in every year to take tags out of the system. i know it sounds crazy but look who we are dealing with. In wisconsin you must check in your deer after harvest. But that might be another "barrier." On the rifle hunts it would not be that hard either. All the hunt success numbers that they put out are not right either. But what can you expect with poor data. I just see a lot of California trends starting slowly here and with the population increases it will only get worse. D king brought up some very valid comments on their data that in a unit that has low success a 1 or 2 deer miscalculation can have very big ramifications. I feel like they are creating more barriers but that is my opinion.

[CouesWhitetail]

The ADA held it's annual members meeting last night and one of our members sent in this letter regarding the hunt guidelines. The ADA will be taking the position of being opposed to the general push by the dept toward more "opportunity". The ADA statement is still being drafted. But the member who sent a letter into the ADA asked that I post his letter here, so I am doing so. He will be writing a lengthy letter and giving it to the commission and dept to make they know he is against these changes in the hunt guidelines. His suggestion is that everyone write in their comments as well and attend the commission meeting this weekend in Payson to voice your opinion.

 

To the Officers and Directors of the Arizona Deer Association,

 

Concerning the current "Guidelines for the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Hunting Seasons" as proposed by the Arizona Game and Fish Department I am requesting that the Arizona Deer Association take the position of OPPOSING in general the entire package.

 

While there are items I normally would support and agree with there is not enough time to define them in this message.

 

In general for the Big Game species I feel there will be long term negitive impacts in both quanity and quality.

 

In Arizona we do not have ability to support vast numbers of big game animals (and wildlife) but our quality is world known and has great value beyond just financial. It is a value to the PUBLIC as a whole.

 

I feel these proposals if put into practice will result in damage to the wildlife and to the goal of recruitment and retention of hunters so "OPPORTUNITY"

will have no importance.

 

Please accept this recommendation and aggressively encourage other individuals and organizations to take this position of OPPOSITION as well.

 

Sincerely,

 

Blaine Bickford

1-602-319-8907

[Ron G.]

I know the game and fish have the survey results that say the majority (~70%) of people want more opportunity (knowing quality and success will go down), but it doesn't seem like the current draw and harvest data supports that 70%. In looking at the harvest report data from the 2007-08 regs book from pages 37-38, it shows that there are 11 units/hunts (general season) that presumably have 100% draw odds. That is supposedly 11 hunts that if you put in for 1st choice you *should* get drawn.

 

Why don't people put in for those hunts? Is it they don't think the quality is that good? I realize people have 'favorite' units and places they want to hunt, but I think a lot of people want more than the game and fish can provide...

 

Those 11 hunts provide quite a bit of 'opportunity'... Am I off base here, or reading things wrong???

 

Not sure what the answer is for providing more opportunity for elk hunts. OTC tags for limited opportunity is a start. That provides opportunity, although limited, but you are ensured a tag. I'd be interested to hear what people think about the quality of those hunts...

 

Ron

[CouesWhitetail]

Ron,

 

No, you are not off base. That was one of our main arguments for trying to get AGFD to not cut the Dec WT tags in favor of creating more early season tags. Many of the early season hunts have 100% draw odds, so if someone just wanted to get a tag every year for WT they easily can get drawn every year for those units. Why cut prime Dec WT tags that are in extremely high demand to create more permits for the early seasons when those are not even filling up? I think the reason those early seasons don't sell out is because they are less desireable units. Again pointing to the fact that people don't just want any opportunity....

 

Amanda

[Outdoor Writer]

Amanda,

 

Does ADA know how many deer tags go unsold after the draw and second chance sale?

 

Also, does ADA have any idea of the number of people that apply for the Dec. hunts as first choice and those early "100%" hunts or other "less desirable" ones as 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th choices ?

 

And...does ADA have a total for the folks who apply for a deer tag in AZ and do not draw or get one from the 2nd chance sale but would get one if there were more "less deireable" tags.

 

Lastly, would ADA be in favor of eliminating deer baiting to cut the harvest down in lieu of going to limited archery permits??

 

-TONY

[Red Rabbit]

Tony,

 

I had added up some total numbers from the 2006 bonus point analysis.

 

For the Oct & Nov Whitetail hunts, there were 10,097 first choice applicants for the 15,345 permits. For the quality Dec hunts, there were 10,474 first choice applicants for the 1875 Dec permits. In other words, 51% of the applicants applied for the quality Dec hunts and 49% for the early opportunity hunts. 51% of the first choice applicants would like to draw for only 11% of the tags. 51% of the applicants would like a quality trophy hunt over an opportunity hunt. 10474 hunters applied for only 1875 permits, for a mathematical draw percentage of 18%. 10,097 first choice hunters applied for 15,345 permits for an overall draw average of 100% (more permits than applicants).

 

Doug~RR

[Outdoor Writer]

Doug,

 

Those figures don't surprise me at all.

 

It seems obvious to me that when hunters know they can easily get a less desireable tag, they will apply for the most desireable hunt as first choce. It's a no-brainer. Any idea how many of the 51% for the late hunts had a less desireable hunt for their other choice(s)??

 

And...there are probably lots of folks who apply for the Kaibab or Strip as 1st choice and a whitetail hunt as 2nd, 3rd, etc. That was my way until I realized I was eating up my bonus points by applying for Coues and getting it. Now, only two deer choices -- Kaibab and Kaibab -- even though the draw odds are what -- like 3%?

 

Nothing much has changed over the last 45 years since I started hunting in AZ, even when we were handing out almost 100,000 deer tags per year in the early 1980s! Now we have MORE people vying for a 1/3 the number of permits. That means a LOT of people who want to hunt deer aren't getting to hunt deer but would if they have a chance at any permit -- even one of those less desireable hunts. I'm guessing that's why all the leftovers disappear quickly when the first-come sale kicks off.

 

The same occurs with elk on the rut hunts on a smaller scale, of course. In this case, though, the 2nd and 3rd choices on those apps usually go unfulfilled because of so few permits in the "less desireable" elk hunts.

 

Curious, -- I should know this but don't -- how many members in the ADA? -TONY

[KGAINES]

I worry about giving up anything we have right now, once its gone we will never get it back. If we take away deer baiting or salt, how long will it be before you aren't allowed to hunt over water, and don't say that is taking it to the extreme because twenty years ago nobody was worried about it and we probably should have been. If we start allowing the loss of hunting because certain methods work better than others how long before calling of any kind becames illegal, it sure helps with elk and predators, if we give up something just to keep something else we are losing, we have to fight to keep what we have or else we lose. The azgfd and the commission want to create more opportunity, but at what cost, some of these changes that are forced on us because a survey says so sucks, because a survey can be skewed by the creator to show exactly what is wanted in the first place. It was mentioned last night that the draw process is a survey in itself, people apply for the quality hunts because that IS what they WANT. I will say everyone wants to hunt and so yes the leftovers are picked up.

I just think we need to be real careful how we allow this to proceed, some changes are good, some are not, and even if they aren't they usually don't get fixed they are just manipulated to show that it is right, and they already have a survey to prove it.

 

Tony I will try to get you the ADA membership total.

 

I will say that what the ADA does for deer and habitat in AZ is beyond words.

[CouesWhitetail]

Hi Tony,

 

Looks like RR answered some of your questions regarding applicants. I don't have the answers to the rest of your questions regarding the sale of left over permits. Good questions. It would be interesting to know. However, I will continue to say, and I don't think you would disagree, that anyone who wants a WT tag in Arizona can draw one almost every year. You just apply for a unit and hunt season with 100% draw odds (or some are in the 90% draw odds range). That is what I did for several years so I could go hunting and get some experience with these little deer. Then I got a little pickier and wanted to hunt Dec WT in 24a. And I was happy to realize that I could draw a tag about every 2-3 years for that prime hunt. Not anymore. Now, in 24a, we have lost 95% of the permits for the Dec hunt (it was cut 90% last year, and that 10% remaining is now being cut to 5%). So now I have almost zero chance of getting a Dec WT tag in 24a. For me and many others who enjoy the Dec WT hunts the moves made in the last two years are a significant loss of opportunity.

 

There are about 600 members currently in the ADA. And the ADA doesn't currently have an official position on the baiting issue, but of course we will be discussing it as the banning of salt seems to be coming very quickly.

 

Amanda

[AZcoues_addict]

Its funny that I was just discussing the oppportunity over quality, and why the 2006 survey was every created. The draw data is available and every applicants choices are on record, why not use that as complete data for what hunters want?...

 

Here is most of what I had on AZOD with a few modifications...

 

What hit me most at last nights meeting was in direct conflict with one of Dave's thoughts..."5. Do not accept recommendations that do not promote the quality of wildlife in Arizona". However, they want to reduce the buck to doe ratio in most of the state in this time of drought, are you kidding me! Also, they recommend reducing the bull to cow ratio as well! Why alter one of the best hunts in the world, elk hunting in AZ? They are trying to appease the complainers that do not want to sacrifice the price for what is best for the wildlife???

 

They just want to sell more tags and give more opportunity but the sacrifice is reduced success and that is obviously the only way! Why couldn't they just ask,"would you rather have a 50% success rate hunt on nice bucks and draw every 4 years, or a 10% success rate hunt on spikes and fork horns and draw ever year"? The G&F makes it sound more political and like it will help get kids involved (which I am for), but I feel that is the smoke screen. Manage the heard best you see fit regardless of what others want, and the sales will be there, don't become a business supply and demand manager of wildlife, be the conservationist.

 

The thing I find the most obvious, is that what the hunters wanted before the 2006 survey could've been interpreted by application data every year! Why even have the survey? IMO just to pave the road toward selling more tags? The G&F has the application data, and could've made the conclusion based on applications, that many hunters are trophy hunters based on their 1st choice, right? Well the first choice is the only data they need to determine if you're an archer or rifle hunter and adjust the tag % to reduce archery opportunity according to what I heard at last night's meeting! Humm?

[Outdoor Writer]

I don't have time this morning to address many of the comments and questions because I'm headed off to Arrowhead Hospital in a bit so a nice Swedish blond lady can carve on my torso a bit. So hang loose for a day or two and I shall return.

 

In the meantime, here are a couple more questions to think about in regards to "trophy hunting." I'm curious to hear opinions on why hunting a trophy deer or elk has anything to do with the season.

 

IOW, let's take a Dec. Coues hunt; do the trophies magically appear in certain units for Xmas parties, or what? Where are they when the Oct. and Nov. seasons occur? Same questions for the big bulls during the rut hunts; do they go "poof" and disappear during the later seasons? Or...perhaps because the actual hunting takes less effort is the reason these are considered "trophy hunts?"

 

Lastly, pasted below are the figures for many years of permits stats. Mull them over a bit and then we'll talk about them when I return. Pay attention especially to the number of 1st chice applicants to the number of permits being issued over the last few years.

 

Now everyone play nice while I'm "incapacitated." -TONY

 

Historical - General

 

Year 1stC Permits issued

 

1971 - 77437

1972 66905 74096

1973 83334 75200

1974 79664 82650

1975 80929 79750

1976 86829 83125

1977 83593 84265

1978 84017 81675

1979 85072 78215

1980 94285 79409

1981 92679 77755

1982 91673 83045

1983 71826 94285

1984 72989 92545

1985 80014 92345

1986 82982 94871

1987 84145 87340

 

More Recent

 

General

 

2000 85091 46072

2001 83808 44978

2002 84384 42020

2003 86546 37260

2004 90057 36665

2005 83264 37918

2006 85534 3813(0) There was misprint elimnating a # on this one.

 

Junior

 

2000 2427 1250

2001 2571 1625

2002 2863 1510

2003 2855 980

2004 2815 1030

2005 2634 1280

2006 2581 1332

 

Muzzleloader Historical

 

1984 424 950

1985 263 950

1986 337 950

1987 402 750

1988 556 1000

1989 877 1250

1990 713 1139

1991 772 1181

 

Muzzleloader More Recent

2000 1489 915

2001 1456 869

2002 1775 995

2003 1585 745

2004 1896 783

2005 1498 859

2006 1724 924

 

Archery - Tags sold

 

2000 25338

2001 23783

2002 23082

2003 22447

2004 22675

2005 22949