Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Possible proposal that would limit the amount of succesful tags drawn to 2

  1. #1
    Member sharksinthesalsa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    wasilla ak
    Posts
    640

    Question Possible proposal that would limit the amount of succesful tags drawn to 2

    I heard of a proposal that may be submitted that would only allow you to win a maximum of 2 tags. You would still be able to apply for all species and your three preferences for those species. This would basically allow you to have a preference to the species that you would like to draw the most. It seems that every year there are always people who draw multiple tags 2,3 or even 4 tags. Realistically not many people have the resources, knowledge of the areas, ability to take time off from work or what have you to be able to utilize each tag. It always seems that those people end up saying "Well, I drew this this and this. But I can only afford to do this". This proposal would in effect make you pick which hunts you will most likely participate in and leave those unused tags in the pot to be won by those who will use them or those who may have never actually won a permit before, even after years and years of applying.


    So the application form would be the same just on the one side of each species there would be a space where you would write in a number to your preference for drawing that species....write 1 to whatever number of species you were applying for

    There are many variables that are possible but basically if you got picked for your first two preference species then you are out of the running for the remainder of the species and those tags would be allocated to other applicants....

    One other variance would be that you got drawn for a muskox tag that was your number one species preference but did not get drawn for your second preference species, bison...however, you did get drawn for your third species preference, moose...then same as before you would get those two tags and would be ineligible for your remaining preferences/choices

    Another scenario would be that you were not drawn for your first two preference species then you would still be eligible for next highest preferences until you either draw two tags or run out of luck.



    What your thoughts? Would you be for this kind of change, or against it? Why?

    Also I will be printing your responses or at least making the originator of the proposal aware of this thread so your input may directly affect how this proposal is written.

    Thank You.
    "early to bed, early to rise, fish like hell, and make up lies"

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Coffman Cove, POW, Alaska
    Posts
    753

    Default

    Hey Sharks,

    I think it holds little merit and adds even more complexities to the system. Fact is all Alaskan's have the opprutunity to hunt every animal for the most part that have drawings with the exception of bison and Musk Ox (still trying here). Those two animals have an alternate list (ox) or a high participation rate. As for folks drawing multiple tags and not using them there is some built in cushion for tags and the number is higher than they expect hunters. This seems like a proposal of a person whining they didn't get a tag. Random is Random, good on the folks who draw a bunch.

    I drew two more this year, elk and goat. Elk I will hunt from the beach as I get time but won't make a 'hunt' out of it and it appears due to my work schedule I may only get 2 days on my Lost Lake hunt for goat. Not a 'hunt' either but a good hike and if I get one cool, if not even better.

    Tell your buddy it looks like he's whining IMO.

    Good luck though!

    Gooch
    Mike
    www.coffmancoveak.com
    Prince of Wales Island

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Soldonta, Alaska
    Posts
    315

    Default

    I think its a good idea. 2 permits is plenty for 1 person. I hope this goes through. If you are like most folks, fall is the busy work season and its hard enough to get time off for 1 hunt. This is a good idea and no one should get more than 2 permits. I know guys who have applied for trophy moose hunts on the bench for 20 some years and have never won. I also know folks that have won and couldnt go.

  4. #4
    Member AK Wonderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Out of the thousands of people who put in for tags every year a couple dozen manage to draw more than two tags. Just seems like a lot of work, not to mention money, to implement a new regulation to shift around a very small amount of tags. In my opinion, energy would be better spent implementing regulations aimed to improve game numbers. Improving game numbers would equate in more available tags and better quality general season hunts.

    I wouldn't be upset if a two draw tags per person regulation passed but wouldn't push for it myself. I like the random draw, even if that means a small number of people draw 3 or 4 tags.

  5. #5
    Member AK Wonderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    I don't like the argument that many people wouldn't be able to hunt three tags if they drew them. There are many more people who draw only one tag for the year and don't hunt it than there are people who draw three tags and let one go to waste.

  6. #6
    Member Jeff Shannon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    263

    Default

    When you consider that there are tens of thousands of applicants, thousands of permit winners, and then a handful that get more than two permits, your proposal will increase the odds of any one person drawing a tag by just a tiny fraction of a percent. That's nowhere near worth the added headache to the applicants or the additional administrative costs to F&G. I've never drawn more than one tag at a time, and I usually get the goose egg, but I really don't care that a few people get three or more. That's just the way a random drawing works.

  7. #7
    Member Milo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Shannon View Post
    When you consider that there are tens of thousands of applicants, thousands of permit winners, and then a handful that get more than two permits, your proposal will increase the odds of any one person drawing a tag by just a tiny fraction of a percent. That's nowhere near worth the added headache to the applicants or the additional administrative costs to F&G. I've never drawn more than one tag at a time, and I usually get the goose egg, but I really don't care that a few people get three or more. That's just the way a random drawing works.
    I think Jeff is dead on. The resulting increase in odds will be statistically meaningless. Furthermore, the highly coveted species will be still be at the top of everyone's list.
    Death is like an old whore in a bar--I'll buy her a drink but I won't go upstairs with her.

  8. #8
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    I also agree with Jeff. Out of thousands and thousands of applicants, 10 or 20 would end up winning a permit that they might not have won otherwise. For that we would have to redesign computer systems, increase the workload of those who process the applications, and therefore increase the cost of the system. Very little benefit for what is sure to be a reasonably significant cost.

    You simply cannot get more fair than a completely random draw.

  9. #9
    Member dieNqvrs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kodiak
    Posts
    486

    Default

    These tags are not just for fall time or all at once. April/may bear, August sheep, October elk and February ox. This scenario is feasible, and why take that chance away from somebody. I have drawn more than 2 tags in a year and killed 6 species in that fall. It is a perfect system of chance that lets every body have an equal opportunity every year. Leave it alone for a few dozen extra tags distributed to others. While your at it I need some of you hard earned money for my next fly out hunt because I am tired of working hard any more. Doesn't sound right to me either.

  10. #10
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,055

    Default

    If a guy draws more than two then good on 'em. Its a statistically meaningless number of folks who draw more than two anyhow, much less folks who don't manage to hunt them all.

    The number of folks who draw a single tag and don't hunt it is a much larger statistical impact, but even that is meaningless since tag allocations are based on actual harvest data, not the overall numbers of tags.

  11. #11
    Member sharksinthesalsa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    wasilla ak
    Posts
    640

    Default

    hey thanks everybody for your input....it is greatly appreciated....

    i have been scrolling down the list of winners for the past thirty minutes and heres what i have come up with....77 people drew more than three tags and 5 more people drew 4 tags...so a total of 82 tags would have been reallocated this year had this system been in place....

    i did find it odd that some of the multiple permit winners were lumped together some right next to each other..i would scroll through several pages with none then then all of a sudden there would be a couple on one page..i only saw one household that got two people with three permits and several other households that got alot more than three permits....but this isnt about households...

    one lucky nonresident drew an afognak spring brown bear and a cape lisburn grizzly tag for the fall...plus a moose tag for the same area....i bet his face hurts from smiling so much
    "early to bed, early to rise, fish like hell, and make up lies"

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sharksinthesalsa View Post
    i did find it odd that some of the multiple permit winners were lumped together some right next to each other..i would scroll through several pages with none then then all of a sudden there would be a couple on one page..i only saw one household that got two people with three permits and several other households that got alot more than three permits....but this isnt about households...
    what you're probably seeing here is folks who put in as a party hunt with someone in their family.

  13. #13
    Member Ryan B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Shannon View Post
    When you consider that there are tens of thousands of applicants, thousands of permit winners, and then a handful that get more than two permits, your proposal will increase the odds of any one person drawing a tag by just a tiny fraction of a percent. That's nowhere near worth the added headache to the applicants or the additional administrative costs to F&G. I've never drawn more than one tag at a time, and I usually get the goose egg, but I really don't care that a few people get three or more. That's just the way a random drawing works.
    I have to agree with Jeff on this one as well. A suggestion to ensure tags do not go to waste when someone's hunt plans get cancelled, is having the ability for that person to turn there permit back to F&G where it can be awarded to the next person in line for that draw. There are some obvious complications with this, such as having adequate time to prep for a hunt, but at least there is an opportunity to ensure it does not go to waste.
    As someone else stated, the amount of tags not filled by single winners most likely rivals ones not filled by people that have the rarity of receiving more than one or two. A very good point as well is that there are hunts that are scheduled throughout the year which do not conflict with each other, or areas where multiple tags can be filled. There should be restraint in peoples selection on what is the priority for their families when applying for the draw in the beginning. The other reason I disagree with the limitations is it is a random draw. Therefore I'm sure many of you are like myself when the years I do not receive one, I find an area with a registration hunt and go to that area due to still having the obligation to fill my freezer for my family.

  14. #14
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    I would be against this kind of proposal.

    One thing not brought up yet I think is that the tag numbers are based on the fact that not all tag winners will hunt and that of those who do, all won't be successful.

    So the rationale for this proposal doesn't really work out in that regard, cuz if by limiting the tags to two max per person those winners actually end up doing those hunts at a higher percentage rate, it could cause F&G to decrease the actual # of tags available down the line.

    Having tag winners not participate in those hunts isn't necessarily a bad thing.

  15. #15

    Default

    One year my household (3 people total) drew thirteen permits. Everything from delta sheep and bison to kodiak brown bear, moose, caribou and elk. We made every hunt but the elk (it overlapped the bison hunts) and scored some really nice animals, including a 42-1/2" Dall and a 10-6 Kodiak. We filled all of our tags on the hunts we made and shared the mountain of meat and memories with lots of extended family who did not draw tags. Then we went about eight years in a row with nothing but goose eggs.

    Statistically, the odds of a single draw are slim, and a multiple draw is much slimmer. To repeat annually is almost a statistical impossibility. Also, there are hunts that typically have a higher chance of winning than more popular hunts, so some applicants may choose that hunt as a back-up in the event they don't draw anything else (Kenai Mt. caribou for example).

    Administratively, which hunt would you bump if an applicant drew 3 tags? I agree the costs far outweigh the benefits on this proposal and I hope it fails. I would much rather see an alternate list drawn and the opportunity to relinquish a tag that won't be used for someone that will use it. The dark cloud to that silver lining may be fewer tags in the draw because fish and game uses a statistical variable that accounts for the number of tags that won't be hunted when they determine how many to issue. If all the tags might be used, then fewer will be available.

  16. #16
    Member Ken R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    149

    Default

    F&G has enough problems getting the results out (on time?) with a less-than-complicated system. If you throw these kinds of computer programming hurdles in the way the results will likely come out in July (at least for a couple years).

  17. #17

    Default

    77 winners out of 123,000+ applicants drew more then 3 tags.

  18. #18
    Member kjashen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Juneau, Alaska
    Posts
    141

    Default

    I agree, having F&G change everything for the few tags that are drawn is a waste of time and money better spent on management.

  19. #19
    Member oakman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    Jeff & Bushrat nailed this on the head above. From a math point this just doesn't work out. I was one of these lucky guys a few years ago (also the same hunting season when my first kid was born). I managed to get out and hunt just fine. I have applied consistently for years for more than $50 worth of permits per year. Last year I spent $65 on permits and won nothing. Most years I haven't won a thing. Over a total of about 12 years of applying for permits, I have only drawn something in 2009 (Delta Sheep, Kodiak Goat, and 20A bull moose) and 2010 (TMA). Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Complicating this is the vast difference in draw success rate. Some of the permits I apply for have such a low chance at success that I don't expect to win (like bison or DS123). Others have a success rate over 50% that I do expect to have a good chance at. Are these multiple permit winners getting 3-5 coveted tags? Probably not. As Bushrat pointed out, if they award 100 fewer tags (out of thousands), then they will just reduce the number of tags to be awarded. In the end we have spent a bunch of time and money (taxpayer money) making a good system more complicated. Also don't forget that the draw next year would be all screwed up by F&G and someone would sue so none of us would be able to win a tag next year and everyone would be ticked off.

    In reality, there is nothing wrong with the current system other than the fact that after the results come out every year, there is some conspiracy theorist that claims you only win if you know someone and the guys that won 8 tags are what cost you that chance to hunt delta bison.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    the Break Away Republic of Eagle River
    Posts
    513

    Default

    heres the better scenario.....tell the original proposer to move to Colorado and figure out how to fix that system first. It aint never gonna fly here.

    I'd rather see the BOG increase the total number of chances on each species from 3 to 5, heck make it 10! More money for F/G, same # tags drawn, and even less odds to draw for all the whiners out there. Also - if it were up to me, I'd allow peeps that drew bison, but didnt kill one the chance to enter to enter the draw again after 1 year, not 10, I hate that rule!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •