New Law

[TLT]

If you apply and receive a hunting tag you must hunt.
Exception giving only to medical or military.
If you do not hunt the given tag you cannot apply for any tags following year.
If you lie about hunting and do not hunt you are banned forever of applying for tags.
Its a joke but after listening to all and not getting a tag this year I had to take a swing for fun.

 

[.338WM]

Now that would certainly spread some tags around !

 

[anchskier]

Now that would certainly spread some tags around !

Not really. It would mean that they could only give out about 1/3 or less of the number of tags that they give out currently. Wouldn't change the odds that anyone else would get a permit at all.

 

[wiso_67]

Alot of things can happen in the months after applying for a tag, loss of job, family emergency, to name a few, plus there would be no way to really show proof that a person did not hunt.
Lets say you drew a cow tag for a certain area and while traveling to that area you spotted a huge bull moose and you had your general harvest ticket, would you drop the bull and not hunt the permit? because lets face it no tag is really 100% garanteed. just curious and saying.

 

[.338WM]

Not really. It would mean that they could only give out about 1/3 or less of the number of tags that they give out currently. Wouldn't change the odds that anyone else would get a permit at all.

I don't follow you. If members of the pool are eliminated then odds would increase, that is part of the reason for the moratorium now in place for sheep and bison tags, the number of available tags would not be affected. Anyhow, this is all a pipe dream at best and humor at worst.

 

[jkb]

I don't follow you. If members of the pool are eliminated then odds would increase, that is part of the reason for the moratorium now in place for sheep and bison tags, the number of available tags would not be affected. Anyhow, this is all a pipe dream at best and humor at worst.

Well if more people hunted these tags then the success rate would go up and the number of tags would have to go down. So even if people were not appling or could not apply there would be less tags so the odds would probably stay the same.

 

[anchskier]

I don't follow you. If members of the pool are eliminated then odds would increase, that is part of the reason for the moratorium now in place for sheep and bison tags, the number of available tags would not be affected. Anyhow, this is all a pipe dream at best and humor at worst.

Here is how it works. The ADF&G have a target harvest goal for each hunt. They have to then figure out how many permits to give out to achieve that harvest goal. For example, let's say they want 10 animals harvest from a specific area. They know from past history that, of the people who actually hunt, 50% are successful. They also know from past history that about 50% of the people who get permits don't hunt it at all for whatever reason. As a result, they need to give out 40 permits to achieve the 10 animal harvest (40 x 50% = 20 hunted for, 50% success of those 20 = 10 harvested). All this is factored into the equation. If they knew that everyone who got a permit was required to hunt, they would only be able to give out about 20 permits due to the typical 50% success rate. If they still gave out the same 40 permits, they would most likely have a huge overharvest of the herd. If you have 100 applications for that hunt historically, it would have a 40% drawing rate (40 permits given to 100 applicants). If you implemented a requirement that you must hunt the permit, you would eliminate most or all of those 50% I mentioned above that don't hunt it, thus you would only have 50 applicants for the available 20 permits (still 40% draw chance).

Basically, yes, you would have fewer applying, but the number of available permits would also be much less meaning odds of drawing would be nearly the same for those still entering. Obvisouly there would be some varying factors that don't make the actual numbers quite as clean, but you can see from this how it works generally.

 

[.338WM]

This is where things really get funny. A thread intended as a joke which is taking a path toward debate over an issue that is unrealistic and speculative.

Have to love the irony.:lol:

 

[strangerinastrangeland]

It would be funny if I hadnt seen multipull people recive Muskox tags back in the Teir II days and the fed permits were only being given to the friends of the Nome fed guy who came to give 'em out........and they didnt hunt because they didnt like to eat Ox.......:shot:

Maby not 'funny', TLT, but certainly a good idea!!:topjob:

Rep to you, Man.

 

[Milo]

I will certainly keep an eye on this proposal once you submit it to the board of game.

 

[akdube]

This is where things really get funny. A thread intended as a joke which is taking a path toward debate over an issue that is unrealistic and speculative.

Have to love the irony.:lol:

You knew it was coming...

 

[.338WM]

You knew it was coming...

You got that right !

 

[LuJon]

I will certainly keep an eye on this proposal once you submit it to the board of game.

They will blow off that proposal faster than they tune out everything that comes out of Priscilla's mouth

 

[Milo]

ummm really? Every year "there needs to be a law"....

 

[Matt]

Yay! More laws! [sarcasm]

 

[FishKing]

So what your saying is PETA would not be alllowed to apply to hog up the tags and protect the poor little Bou and Moose? (that does not seem right........ Sarcasm)

 

[germe1967]

Not really. It would mean that they could only give out about 1/3 or less of the number of tags that they give out currently. Wouldn't change the odds that anyone else would get a permit at all.

It would be nice to see people who applied and didn't get a tag this year get a leg up somehow for next year. Some people here are getting multiple tags for the same hunts years running. Probly just good fortune. Maybe just ADF&G making sure that issued tags actually get filled. But honestly, any law changing the draw to anything by the purely random draw we are told it is now just opens the system up to corruption, or more corruption if its already corrupt. So leave well enough alone.

One question, did I miss an option when signing up for my hunting license and maintaining the same license number as last year?

 

[anchskier]

It would be nice to see people who applied and didn't get a tag this year get a leg up somehow for next year. Some people here are getting multiple tags for the same hunts years running. Probly just good fortune. Maybe just ADF&G making sure that issued tags actually get filled. But honestly, any law changing the draw to anything by the purely random draw we are told it is now just opens the system up to corruption, or more corruption if its already corrupt. So leave well enough alone.

One question, did I miss an option when signing up for my hunting license and maintaining the same license number as last year?

Nobody gets the same permit two years in a row. We are not even elegible to apply for any permits we drew the previous year (sometimes longer timeframes for some specific hunts such as sheep, bear, and bison).

I have never heard of keeping the same license number from year to year. We all get a customer service number (CSN) to use on the applications so they can easily tie our hunting history to a specific person, but that is about it. I guess the lifetime license holders (seniors 65+) would maintain the same number from year to year since they are always working off the same license.

 

[germe1967]

Ok. Sorry for the error. I mistakingly took other people claiming to have gotten the same tags years in a row on other threads at face value. Perhaps they misspoke. Anyway, my opinion remains to leave well enough alone.
And it would be nice to be able to pay for your basic licenses for hunting, fishing, etc for life for residents and then get your specific endorsements etc at a yearly, bi-yearly or something like that basis. But from what I've read on other threads about that, the more experienced hunters and fishers believe that opens Pandora's box.

 

[anchskier]

Ok. Sorry for the error. I mistakingly took other people claiming to have gotten the same tags years in a row on other threads at face value. Perhaps they misspoke. Anyway, my opinion remains to leave well enough alone.
And it would be nice to be able to pay for your basic licenses for hunting, fishing, etc for life for residents and then get your specific endorsements etc at a yearly, bi-yearly or something like that basis. But from what I've read on other threads about that, the more experienced hunters and fishers believe that opens Pandora's box.

No problem. I think what you are seeing on the other threads are people who are just getting A tag or two multiple years in a row, not necessarily the SAME tag. Some mentioned that they have gotten tags in the same area as they got the year before, but that wouldn't require it to be the same hunt. Some areas I hunt have three or more different sub-units or seasons for moose that are considered different hunts. Ft. Rich archery hunts would be a good example. Although you couldn't get the same season, same permit two years running, you could apply for and get one of the other similar permits (i.e. DM424 vs DM427).

Like you said, I think the lifetime license thing just opens a lot of potential problems. Much simpler to have everyone do the same thing each year than have to deal with having to track lifetime license rules, but that is another subject for another thread.