Make MT Sheep/Goat Once in a Lifetime?

[406LIFE]

Since we have such a concentration of Montana hunters who are informed I thought I would pose this question to the forum. I am doing some preliminary research for a legislator on this topic. I would ask that you also keep responses civil.

Would you be in favor of making Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goats once in a life time in Montana?

1. If they were made OIL, how would you handle those who have already drawn, and have started to accrue points again?

2. What other issues might you see in making this change?

3. Do you see the loss of ~150 applicants who successfully draw and are no longer able to participate in 7 years as acceptable to make the draw more equitable?

4. Would you see this an an equitable way to distribute a resource that is very limited and declining?

5. If sheep and goat were OIL, would you be in favor of a waiting period after a successful draw and then allow a hunter to purchase an Unlimited Bighorn Tag?


(Please don't hijack this thread with Off Topic responses or rabbit trails that may not add to the conversation.)

 

[Big Fin]

When I sat on the committee that came up with the MT bonus point system, I suggested OIL for moose/goat/sheep. Being 15 years the junior of most committee members, it was the closest I ever came to be placed under citizens arrest for blasphemy. Most guys on the committee had drawn one or multiple M/G/S tag and they wanted a few more of each before they hung up their rifles.

I still think it would be a good idea. But, experience says, "Good luck with that."

 

[Point Creep]

What is the logic behind it? The goal?

 

[MThuntr]

My shortsighted response is...I support making any of the Big 3 Once-in-a-lifetime. My initial feeling is that there will be a bunch of grumpy dudes mad that they can't shoot 2 and they would feel entitled to be "grandfathered" in if they had points. HOWEVER, I don't see excluding those 150-200 affecting future drawing results especially if populations drop.

This will probably get me in trouble but I would support the OIL Sheep tag where a person could hunt the Unlimited areas until you either shoot a ram or get drawn in a limited entry area...after which you are no longer eligible for any sheep tag (ewes included).

 

[brymoore]

It will slightly improve draw odds.

 

[bigsky2]

I think they should be OIL, maybe make it OIL only if the person is successful in filling their tag. It doesn't seem right to me that many people will never draw the tags in their lifetime while others will have the tags multiple times. Since they made the change to where you don't have to front the tag fees when applying, applicants went up 20% (this may have just been for sheep).

To answer question #1, just make the change going forward and treat everyone equal right now. If someone has drawn in the past and has accrued points, you can't take their points away.

Instead of giving out so many ewe tags, I wish Montana would try to establish new herds throughout the state. FWP gives out 150 ewe tags in the Breaks units, if there's such a surplus of sheep why not move some of them to places like the Terry badlands or Makoshika State Park? I'm sure there are reasons like proximity to domestic sheep, etc., but I am not aware of any attempts to establish sheep herds in areas like that. It just seems like Montana isn't as ambitious as some of the other states' wildlife agencies when it comes to things like that.

 

[LopeHunter]

Odds will not change much with OIL as are so few tags relative to the pool of applicants.

CO thins the herd a bit by having a wait period on Big 3 then the "3 + x" system that extends your wait another 3 years. OIL is more radical since wait is forever.

I would propose the ID model for Big 3. ID requires you apply for only 1 Big 3 each year. Either you apply for sheep or goat or moose, and that would do more than anything to improve the odds for the Big 3 animal you value most to hunt next. I like this approach as thins out applicants that figure "what the heck, might as well apply for this species, too, while am applying" and to me that is a good thing. Sure, I want to hunt a moose and would hunt the tag if awarded but if you make me choose in MT then am applying for sheep unless goat odds are 5x better.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I think they should be OIL, maybe make it OIL only if the person is successful in filling their tag. It doesn't seem right to me that many people will never draw the tags in their lifetime while others will have the tags multiple times. Since they made the change to where you don't have to front the tag fees when applying, applicants went up 20% (this may have just been for sheep).

To answer question #1, just make the change going forward and treat everyone equal right now. If someone has drawn in the past and has accrued points, you can't take their points away.

Instead of giving out so many ewe tags, I wish Montana would try to establish new herds throughout the state. FWP gives out 150 ewe tags in the Breaks units, if there's such a surplus of sheep why not move some of them to places like the Terry badlands or Makoshika State Park? I'm sure there are reasons like proximity to domestic sheep, etc., but I am not aware of any attempts to establish sheep herds in areas like that. It just seems like Montana isn't as ambitious as some of the other states' wildlife agencies when it comes to things like that.

It's also because of politics. In the last few sessions, we've dealt with a few bills that would have essentially elimiated the ability of the agency to move sheep (1 bill was specific to sheep) or to move any critter at all (Sponsored by Senator Fielder).

So long as the legislature is antagonistic to sheep conservation, we will not see new herds in Eastern or Central Montana.

 

[grandejuan]

Here in AZ we are OIL if you harvest. Since we have both Desert and Rocky Mtn. sheep a hunter who has harvested one type can apply for the other. As most of you are aware we also have a point system that does allow folks with few points a chance to draw. A hunter can apply for both species on one application. Randy has the full description on how it works or you can also consult the AZ Fish and Game Dept. As an aside, AZGFD is an independent agency, not part of a Dept of Natural Resources. GJ

 

[brownbear932008]

Odds will not change much with OIL as are so few tags relative to the pool of applicants.

CO thins the herd a bit by having a wait period on Big 3 then the "3 + x" system that extends your wait another 3 years. OIL is more radical since wait is forever.

I would propose the ID model for Big 3. ID requires you apply for only 1 Big 3 each year. Either you apply for sheep or goat or moose, and that would do more than anything to improve the odds for the Big 3 animal you value most to hunt next. I like this approach as thins out applicants that figure "what the heck, might as well apply for this species, too, while am applying" and to me that is a good thing. Sure, I want to hunt a moose and would hunt the tag if awarded but if you make me choose in MT then am applying for sheep unless goat odds are 5x better.

I have always been a fan of the Idaho system myself. That combined with the squared points could be very interesting IMO. I only say this because I'm a little bias with 12 going on 13 points this year into sheep and goat.
I understand it won't change odds much. But there are always guys every year that draws a second or third tag in one particular big three. If I ever draw any of them I won't apply again personally if I take an animal. I think a lot of people do that anyway.

 

[6mm Remington]

Absolutely! This is something I have been bringing up and trying to get it moving forward for a long time. I feel that bull moose, bighorn rams, mountain goats, and grizzly bears should be once in a lifetime! Hopefully in 2020 we will have a Montana hunt for grizzly bears! Every hunter I know and interact with feel this would be a good change and although it will not dramatically increase anyone's odds of drawing one of these tags, it's still a step in the right direction. Bull moose, ram bighorn sheep, mountain goats, and grizzly bears should be Once In A Lifetime!

1. For those folks who have previously drawn one of these tags I don't think you can put that genie back in the bottle again. Allow those folks who have drawn previously to still be able to apply.

2. As we know FWP gets their money to run the department from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses. This change will not dramatically effect the amount of income that FWP would bring in and I don't feel is a basis for not moving forward with this idea. Only slightly getting off track for just a second, I feel that it's past due that Montana FWP is hard funded partially through the Montana legislature. I feel that it would help them make some better decisions on game management in the state if they weren't so completely tied to license sales.

3. As noted, this is not a move that is going to make dramatic changes on our chances of getting one of these incredible tags, but it's a step in the right direction that's way overdue! No-one truly deserves to hunt and take more than one of these fabulous creatures and if they feel that they have that right, well then they are just being selfish. There are only so many opportunities for one of these special tags and only so many of them to go around. I've put in now for 40 years IN A ROW for moose and sheep in Montana and I have never drawn a tag! Yes I know it's the luck of the draw and all of that but I also know that each of us dedicated hunters knows personally folks who have drawn multiple ram bighorn sheep, bull moose, and mountain goat tags. I know one fellow who drew a Rock Creek bighorn ram tag one year and got a beautiful 43" ram. He waited 7 years as is currently mandatory and the first year he was eligible to apply again, he put in for a Petty Creek ram tag and drew the tag! Yes he killed another ram! This is just an example but the fact is that there are only so many of these special tags to go around and the number of folks who apply is very high. I'd like to see me, my friends, my family, or any of you hunters on this forum have at least an outside chance of drawing one of these tags, and these folks who are able to draw multiple tags isn't helping matters!

4. It's a step, but as noted it's not going to really shake the odds of drawing a tag up. Bighorn rams and bull moose should be once in a lifetime. With ewe sheep and cow moose this is what I propose should happen with those tags. If a person draws a ewe sheep or a cow moose then that person cannot every put in for another ewe sheep or cow moose permit again. If they draw a bighorn ram or a bull moose tag, then that person cannot apply for a ewe sheep or cow moose for 7 years. If they draw the ewe sheep or the cow moose first, then they cannot apply for the bighorn ram or bull moose tag for 7 years. So technically a person could potentially get two bighorn sheep (ewe & ram) and two moose (cow & bull). Mountain goats are either sex tags and should be one and done as both billies and nannies make fabulous trophies. Same goes for a grizzly bear. Harvest either a boar or a sow and you are done.

5. Drawing any of the Big 4 would not prevent a person from buying and being drawn for one of the Super Tags for any of these animals. That's completely a game of chance and if a person is so lucky as to draw one of the Super Tags also, well God Bless them for they are very lucky! The money that comes in from the sales of the Super Tag chances goes directly to projects for each of these animals and is something that helps these species.

The unlimited bighorn tag is something unique in itself. The odds of killing a ram in one of these units is very difficult and not very good. I would not object to still allowing a person who is lucky enough to draw and kill a bighorn ram in one of the draw units from getting a tag for the unlimited units and killing a ram there. Now if and when that lucky person does kill a ram in the unlimited units, I could see this going one of two ways and personally I would be fine with either direction.

A person kills a ram in an unlimited unit then they cannot kill another unlimited ram in any of these unlimited units. It is one and done.
OR
If a person kills a ram in an unlimited unit, they would have to wait 7 years before they could apply and obtain another unlimited ram permit.

Thanks to the OP for bringing this topic up again. Lets work towards making this happen. We need to e-mail and call our folks at Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks to bring this up to them again. I believe this will take a representative or legislator to bring forth a bill to make something like this happen. I have no idea on who might be a good person to do that for us. That's something we will have to figure out as we go forward.

David

 

[6mm Remington]

It's also because of politics. In the last few sessions, we've dealt with a few bills that would have essentially elimiated the ability of the agency to move sheep (1 bill was specific to sheep) or to move any critter at all (Sponsored by Senator Fielder).

So long as the legislature is antagonistic to sheep conservation, we will not see new herds in Eastern or Central Montana.

Senator Fielder is no friend of sportsmen and of our public lands! Need to get her voted out!

 

[JEL]

I always thought that maybe they should be OIL although I don't think it would improve the odds enough to matter much. Might change the perception a bit when people draw more than once. I will admit that I am hypocritical on the subject. I drew a moose tag about 10 years ago and swore I wouldn't put in again but as soon as my 7 years were up I couldn't help myself.

 

[MTGomer]

I’m pretty indifferent on whether or not the big 3 draw tags are OIL.
As long as unlimited sheep units are kept out of it.

 

[mtmuley]

Not sure it's something that should be high on the list of changes here in Montana. Should go back to fronting all the money to apply. mtmuley

 

[Gerald Martin]

I'm probably in the minority in that I prefer it just the way it is. My family and I have been a lot luckier than many have with drawing the big 3 tags and are currently in the drawing for the second of some species, having sat out the seven year wait and having rejoined the drawing and point building process from the back of the line. I'd be pretty ticked off if the big 3 was made OIL retroactively and I lost the five points and all the drawing fees that I have toward my second goat tag.

I know that some people will say they've been putting in for "30 years without a tag and it isn't fair" but they don't mention that they are drawing for some of the more difficult units where perceived trophy quality is high or convenience to their locality puts a few tags at incredibly low draw odds. Most of those people are putting in for tags where statistically they don't have a high probability of ever drawing a tag during the 40-50 years they might have in a hunting lifetime. That's their strategy for drawing and more power to them.

For the most part my family and I have taken the exact opposite approach and have put in time and money to draw tags in units where the most opportunity was available whether that meant travel across the state, or less people applying because of difficult terrain, lesser trophy areas etc... I've always taken the approach that the opportunity to hunt took precedence and getting the tag was the biggest barrier to experiencing a hunt that will only come once or twice in a lifetime because of statistical odds of drawing even in "easier" areas.

I believe that statistically speaking, those second or third tags drawn by people have a VERY MINOR effect on the odds of people who are still looking to draw their first tag. I'd be interested in seeing what the actual odds changes would be by moving to OIL tags for MSG before screwing up a pretty good system simply because some people consider it unfair that certain people have a more "successful" life experience than they do. I bet the probability of any one individual being better able to draw a tag are almost impossible to calculate.

 

[Point Creep]

This won't make a dent in the odds of drawing for those who haven't drawn. If the goal is better odds, eliminate the ridiculous low application fees. Idaho is a good model to follow where you have to pick what you want to apply for and not apply your entire household for every permit for a dollar each.

 

[Flatland Crusoe]

I wish all lower 48 sheep tags were consolidated so that a punched sheep tag in any lower 48 state was OIL. As an NR, I think you could start effecting the odds quite a bit more if you starting knocking guys out of applying in every sheep state every year once they are drawn.

 

[1_pointer]

I wish all lower 48 sheep tags were consolidated so that a punched sheep tag in any lower 48 state was OIL. As an NR, I think you could start effecting the odds quite a bit more if you starting knocking guys out of applying in every sheep state every year once they are drawn.

I'm not sure I could see anyway to support that or any rationale for that either. Not a slippery slope I'd like to see even have a chance of getting started.

 

[Flatland Crusoe]

I'm not sure I could see anyway to support that or any rationale for that either. Not a slippery slope I'd like to see even have a chance of getting started.

It would at least kick a few old guys who loaded the game in their favor decades ago out for their 2nd or 3rd round of sheep hunting.

When you have tags whose draw odds are almost all under 1%,often orders of magnitude worse, and the typical hunter might only have 30-40 years of being physically capable of sheep hunting going more than once it isn't mathematically going to change much. Most people are lucky to go sheep hunting even once.

I realize this idea runs counter to the state level management of wildlife, but sheep hunting needs some serious reform.

What would this be a slippery slope towards? Are you worried it somehow would create more auction tags or effect the value of those auctions?