IFish Fishing Forum banner

241 - 260 of 318 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Wow
I didn’t realize non residents made up that big of a chunk of the hunters in a lot of those units. Looks like just the non res cap at 5% will cut hunters by 10 percent total in a lot of the a fair amount of units under proposal

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,010 Posts
748 less nonresident hunters and their dollars is a big loss for Oregon. If the total tag buy is just Elk that is a loss of $568,480.00. If they buy Bear and Deer tags with the Elk $912,560.00 In reality the state will lose a dollar amount between these two numbers. from the deletion of 748 nonresident hunters. The eastern Oregon community's will lose all these hunters money. The fuel tax loss will be a large.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
732 Posts
748 less nonresident hunters and their dollars is a big loss for Oregon. If the total tag buy is just Elk that is a loss of $568,480.00. If they buy Bear and Deer tags with the Elk $912,560.00 In reality the state will lose a dollar amount between these two numbers. from the deletion of 748 nonresident hunters. The eastern Oregon community's will lose all these hunters money. The fuel tax loss will be a large.
Or 748 more hunters on the westside?

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
I think the money component can be a non issue fairly easy. IF the elk herds are hurting, and tags need to be cut a small possible reduction in money coming in shouldn’t be part of the equation.

These 14 new controlled units will now have an $8 per tag application fee associated with them. If needed ODFW could simply increase the cost of those controlled east side elk tags to make up for any loss from decreasing non res tag numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,371 Posts
Back in 2009, I was involved with the budget proposal that raised the administrative fee for applying for controlled hunts from 4.50 to the current 8.00. It was stated EMPHATICALLY by dept bigwigs that this was an administrative fee, and NOT a preference point fee. It was raised because the 4.50 was not covering the cost of running the controlled hunt application system. Adding more people applying for controlled hunts does NOT offset license sales declines according to ODFW. Don't forget that tag fee increases require legislative approval, ODFW cannot just raise tag or license fees. Alsoi remember that the cost of a preference point in Oregon is ZERO. As far as I know, Oregon is the only western state that runs a preference point system without collecting a fee for the preference point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,368 Posts
Reality sucks, can't keep using the elk for a cash cow and drive them into the ground. I can't really feel sorry for the department, we have been borrowing against the bull population for a long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garyk

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
So the $8 could raise $100,000, raise the cost of resident archery elk tags $15 that adds another $450,000 if there are 30,000 elk bow hunters.

IF the tags need to be reduced to help the elk numbers it doesn't take a catastrophic fee increase to cover the lost funding.

I have a blast hunting OTC elk every year in Oregon, so I'm not complaining about current tag numbers or how archery seasons are set up. I have hunted most of the western states for elk deer, and more. I'm a resident hunter here, and a non resident hunter in other states. I'm not against non residents.

I haven't seen anything in the proposal about funding, so I don't think that is an issue. ODFW is stating there is an issue with bull elk numbers in almost half of the 14 proposed units, and they are trying to have a way to stop a decline in bull elk numbers. If the other surrounding units aren't controlled, they will be flooded with the other hunters.

IF the bull numbers in the proposed controlled units have dropped as much as the ODFW statistics show from 2014 to 2019, I would much rather be part of the solution today, so I have elk to hunt tomorrow. 30-50 percent reductions in bull to cow ratios in several of the proposed units seems like an issue that has to be addressed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,538 Posts
I think the money component can be a non issue fairly easy.
If needed ODFW could simply increase the cost of those controlled east side elk tags to make up for any loss from decreasing non res tag numbers.
Why not cut some fat from the big wage makers who can't manage game and may feel the pinch like the rest of us rather than raise the rates on hunters again?
It seems if we had a stronger management plan than previously, we wouldn't be in this mess... nuff said
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,327 Posts
Discussion Starter · #251 ·
Tomorrow night's opportunity: :) (y)

Southwest Oregon archery elk hunters asked to provide input on proposed 2022 archery elk seasons

Southwest Oregon archery elk hunters are encouraged to attend an April 7 virtual meeting to learn about proposed changes to the 2022 archery elk seasons and provide their input.

While archery elk hunting in western Oregon and much of eastern Oregon would remain a general season under the draft proposal, several northeast Oregon units would move to some form of controlled archery hunting to better manage elk populations. This proposed change would also more equitably distribute necessary harvest reductions between rifle and archery hunters.

Tags would not be portable to general season hunts, so archery elk hunters would need to choose either Eastern Oregon General, Western Oregon General, or the controlled hunt tag they drew.

ODFW wants input on the draft proposal from hunters before developing a final staff proposal that would go to the Commission at the June 18 meeting. Final Big Game Regulations will be adopted at the September 2021 Commission meeting.

Comments can be taken during this meeting, by emailing [email protected] no later than April 15, or by testifying at the June Commission meeting.

More detailed information is available on ODFW’s March 10 news release and on the Big Game Review page.

Join the April 7 southwest Oregon virtual meeting using ZoomGov or Skype for Business. The meeting runs 6 p.m. – 8 p.m.


Meeting ID: 160 012 6561

One tap mobile
+16692545252,,1600126561# US (San Jose)
+16692161590,,1600126561# US (San Jose)

Dial by your location:
+1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)
+1 669 216 1590 US (San Jose)
+1 646 828 7666 US (New York)
+1 551 285 1373 US

Meeting ID: 160 012 6561

Find your local number: Zoom International Dial-in Numbers - Zoom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,327 Posts
Discussion Starter · #252 ·
4 more days until input on the initial draft is closed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,327 Posts
Discussion Starter · #254 ·
Final day of comment on the initial draft is today :geek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Does anyone know if we were supposed to find out what the final decision was on this proposal this month?

I thought I remembered it was going to be decided sometime in June.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,327 Posts
Discussion Starter · #257 ·
Does anyone know if we were supposed to find out what the final decision was on this proposal this month?

I thought I remembered it was going to be decided sometime in June.
It is being presented as an informational item in June

It will be an agenda item for a decision at the August commission meeting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: michael rankin

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
Exactly why i asked why you said bow season is half as crowded in your original comment. It is not anymore, way worse in my opinion with people, I have bow hunted for 30 plus yrs and cannot believe the amount of people out there anymore. Bowhunting has always been my first choice until recently, when I see less than half the people during rifle season I switched my thinking to avoid the serious overcrowding
Hunted 21 days and found only 6 hunters total last season, and 3 of those were in one group. Complaints by archery hunters about crowding gave the rifle hunter leading the charge at ODFW the push he needed to shove this down archers throats. I dont know about everyone else, but I found avoiding hunters was as easy as avoiding roads and avoiding areas that get talked about too much.

Oh well, guess it is time to leave Oregon for good and give up the pioneer license. Saddest thing is there were ways to achieve their goals without this ridiculous change to rules.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
Hunted 21 days and found only 6 hunters total last season, and 3 of those were in one group. Complaints by archery hunters about crowding gave the rifle hunter leading the charge at ODFW the push he needed to shove this down archers throats. I dont know about everyone else, but I found avoiding hunters was as easy as avoiding roads and avoiding areas that get talked about too much.

Oh well, guess it is time to leave Oregon for good and give up the pioneer license. Saddest thing is there were ways to achieve their goals without this ridiculous change to rules.
There was more than enough rifle hunters, not just archery hunters, that complained how unfair it is. Their feelings were hurt too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,627 Posts
It is being presented as an informational item in June

It will be an agenda item for a decision at the August commission meeting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know this won't be popular, but I personally think every unit in the State for both rifle & bow for Elk & Deer should be subject to the draw. I would also like to see them revamp the point system at the same time.

Something like:

100% points for 1st choice
75% points for 2nd choice
50% points for 3rd choice
25% point for 4th choice
0% points for 5th choice

And for the love of god quit shooting the does and cows.
 
241 - 260 of 318 Posts
Top