My predictions on how this will work out:
Past surveys have repeatedly shown that Idahoan's hate controlled hunts period. They want the opportunity to hunt elk every year with out having to draw. As such, I think they will chime in overwhelmingly against any kind of preference points.
Unfortunately, our legislature are a bunch of a-holes. The speaker (who is usually both the party boss and a high ranking Mormon church official) controls the legislative agenda like an absolute dictator. The entire mess is very susceptible to the influences of minority special interests, which is why this issue ever came up in the legislature in the first place.
Some messed up form of PP will make it onto the legislative floor, despite strong public support against it. That's just Idaho politics. Governor Otter will sign it if it makes it to his desk. It will be up to the lobbying efforts of Sportsmen to stop it. Unfortunately, our sportsmen's lobby has been infiltrated by agriculture interests masquerading as sportsmen, so mustering a strong opposition will be a challenge.
As for IDFG, regardless of what sportsmen want, if they think they can make a buck off this then they will support it. They have a long history of ignoring public sentiment on these types of issues. They are also pretty crafty at spinning this type of thing to manufacture support for their own positions. Indications are so far that they don't see this as a money maker, but they don't have a ton of influence with the legislature.
My personal opinion on it, I HATE it. When I began hunting elk over 25 years ago, with an over the counter Panhandle Zone tag, I could hunt the entire month of September for archery, all of October for rifle, most of November for muzzleloader season, and a good bit of December for late archery. Half of archery and rifle were either sex. Harvesting a big bull was possible, but you had to work your ass off, and had to really know the country.
Now we have to choose a weapon, cows are all controlled hunts, and rifle is pared down to 2 weeks. Elk numbers are down from wolves (over 300 wolves have been killed in the Panhandle since 2012 so don't give me any BS that wolves don't make an impact on elk). The numbers of hunters are up considerably, including the disproportionate share of non-residents we get in the Panhandle compared to the rest of Idaho (there is no NR quota in the Panhandle like there is in other zones).
The overall hunting experience here is getting worse as the number of hunters increases, the amount of ATV traffic increases, and cow calf ratios remain in the red due to predation. Moving to preference points and to more controlled hunts would only exacerbate an already bad and worsening situation. It has never been easy, TV show style hunting here, but there has always been opportunity for those with the skill and determination. Preference points will be the end of opportunity.
Some argue that the sport needs more hunters, but IMO it is a dubious argument. More hunters might mean more dollars to fish and game departments, but those extra dollars don't translate directly into more hunting opportunities or into higher quality opportunities. The money also doesn't translate directly into better habitat, or to larger or more sustainable game populations. However, there is strong evidence that most new spending ends up as waste, spent on superfluous programs. With this, more hunters means a degraded hunting experience for everyone.
We don't need preference points. What we need is habitat free from suburban encroachment, fewer ATV's and lower hunter densities. It is simply unethical to try to keep pumping more hunters into the system, when its already maxed out. That's kind of what PP will accomplish. Let the NR's go to MT, CO and elsewhere to draw hunt. We truly don't need them here, and we don't want controlled hunts to begin with. Its just not a fit for Idaho.
