warmer
Well-known member
NAILED IT!!!!
SD Non Res Archery Changes
- Thread starter blb078
- Start date
sdkhunter
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 198
Just like KS, IA or any other state – we are trying to protect our resources as much as possible while trying to find the mix to make everyone (Res and NR) happy – which I think we can all admit is never going to happen.
You have to dig deeper in the stats and talk to resident hunters that were trying to hunt public land but had multiple NR rigs parked at the gate when they just aren’t used to it…
Based on the 2018 Archery Deer Harvest Projections from our Game and Fish:
There was a total of 1097 Mule deer bucks taken within archery. Out of the 1097, 488 of the mule deer bucks were taken by NR’s vs. 609 taken by residents… Pretty close to an even split. I haven’t taken the time to review states on a case by case basis but I think that’s probably more ‘sharing’ than most states? As others have mentioned, a lot of that can be contributed to the fact that when a NR buys a tag (because I don’t think NR’s are better hunters, they are just more serious and likely to come out and hunt for a solid stretch) – they are going to use it. Many residents buy a tag and maybe hunt a day or two – some never get out all season. There is nothing good or bad about how serious hunters are – it’s just a factor – kinda like over booking a plane… It’s not a problem until too many people start showing up…. It's really a minimal change overall but keep in mind, they are trying to balance many residents that are lobbying that want much more drastic changes... I'd love to hunt IA every year for archery bucks but I get what they are tryign to do and glad they will take my money every 4th year or however the draw ends up - overall I think NR's have it pretty good here for archery deer opportunities...
Moving beyond mule deer, NR’s took 880 whitetail bucks of the 4,772 taken stateside during archery – so about 23% of the overall whitetail bucks were taken by NR’s…. Again, I’d argue that’s a pretty stout number for NR’s getting maybe even more than their fair share….
Within the next 3-5 years, it wouldn’t surprise me to see SD go to a NR draw for all archery tags (at least ones that have access to public) like many of the midwestern states….
You have to dig deeper in the stats and talk to resident hunters that were trying to hunt public land but had multiple NR rigs parked at the gate when they just aren’t used to it…
Based on the 2018 Archery Deer Harvest Projections from our Game and Fish:
There was a total of 1097 Mule deer bucks taken within archery. Out of the 1097, 488 of the mule deer bucks were taken by NR’s vs. 609 taken by residents… Pretty close to an even split. I haven’t taken the time to review states on a case by case basis but I think that’s probably more ‘sharing’ than most states? As others have mentioned, a lot of that can be contributed to the fact that when a NR buys a tag (because I don’t think NR’s are better hunters, they are just more serious and likely to come out and hunt for a solid stretch) – they are going to use it. Many residents buy a tag and maybe hunt a day or two – some never get out all season. There is nothing good or bad about how serious hunters are – it’s just a factor – kinda like over booking a plane… It’s not a problem until too many people start showing up…. It's really a minimal change overall but keep in mind, they are trying to balance many residents that are lobbying that want much more drastic changes... I'd love to hunt IA every year for archery bucks but I get what they are tryign to do and glad they will take my money every 4th year or however the draw ends up - overall I think NR's have it pretty good here for archery deer opportunities...
Moving beyond mule deer, NR’s took 880 whitetail bucks of the 4,772 taken stateside during archery – so about 23% of the overall whitetail bucks were taken by NR’s…. Again, I’d argue that’s a pretty stout number for NR’s getting maybe even more than their fair share….
Within the next 3-5 years, it wouldn’t surprise me to see SD go to a NR draw for all archery tags (at least ones that have access to public) like many of the midwestern states….
tzone
Well-known member
I don’t want to paint with a brush and agree. But, for the most part I agree. I hunt hard. I’m necessarily good at it, but I hunt hard. I’m probably more successful in other stages than I am in MN because of effort.
I suspect it’s the same most places.
I'd be more open to maybe not drawing an archery tag EVERY year and actually be able to hunt the whole season when I do draw it. It's the taking of the first month of the season away from NR's that are buying expensive tags and not allowing NR to hunt federal lands that irritates me the most. At least if it was a draw you then should get the whole season like the Rs. I would hope anyway, but nothing would surprise me at this point now.
Last edited:
beagle001
Well-known member
Yep. If they wanted to limit the amount of NRs or hunters in general in certain high pressure areas, sure. But taking away a month of the season, when the fall is already a crunch, and one weekend NRs can hunt is pheasant opener is rough.
I don’t think they’ll need to limit NR archery licenses in the future- my $286 can go to another state, and I’m sure I am not the only one who feels that way.
That's about the only thing you can do if you want to try to get something to change, as with any product or service you speak with your wallet and eventually after enough people do it someone on the other end will listen. I'll still hunt in Dec like I always have but I can see how not being able to hunt in Sept will upset a lot of people as hunting in decent weather is one of the benefits of bow hunting. I'm sure the resident hunters will be glad if non residents stop coming due to this but eventually someone will have to start paying up for the loss income if enough non residents abandon the state. It would be interesting to see if they keep a stat of how many non resident archery hunters there are by month.
Just throwing this out there:
#1. I also agree that it’s not right that NR are handicapped, by a month, on PUBLIC LANDS.
#2. SD better post up draw results for NR rifle tags well before Aug 1 or the state will lose quite a bit of money. I won’t even consider buying an archery tag until I know if I did or didn’t draw my rifle tag. Same goes if they actually do change the archery deadline to April 1 next year. That’s idiotic IMO. The only reason I’d buy an archery tag is if I didn’t draw my rifle tag and just wanted to go on a scouting trip with my bow to figure things out for when I actually do draw my rifle tag. If I saw a trophy while scouting and learning the land with my bow, it’d just be a bonus.
A lot of us have a lot of options and points out there. One could easily do a hunt elsewhere, even without a draw, in other states. I travel 18 hours to western SD. It’s not hard to stay closer to home or even drive 20 hours to hit another state.
#1. I also agree that it’s not right that NR are handicapped, by a month, on PUBLIC LANDS.
#2. SD better post up draw results for NR rifle tags well before Aug 1 or the state will lose quite a bit of money. I won’t even consider buying an archery tag until I know if I did or didn’t draw my rifle tag. Same goes if they actually do change the archery deadline to April 1 next year. That’s idiotic IMO. The only reason I’d buy an archery tag is if I didn’t draw my rifle tag and just wanted to go on a scouting trip with my bow to figure things out for when I actually do draw my rifle tag. If I saw a trophy while scouting and learning the land with my bow, it’d just be a bonus.
A lot of us have a lot of options and points out there. One could easily do a hunt elsewhere, even without a draw, in other states. I travel 18 hours to western SD. It’s not hard to stay closer to home or even drive 20 hours to hit another state.
MN_Bowhunter4
Well-known member
This. I’d be curious to see the cost-benefit analysis that was done prior to making this change.
I’ve only hunted SD once with my bow and probably the biggest factors in heading over there was the early start date and the ability to apply OTC.
tzone
Well-known member
Usually they're posted pretty quickly after the deadline. I'm guessing you'll know by mid-July on your rifle tag results. But, if I'm reading this correctly you're only going to be able to apply this season in August. Next year will be before the rifle deadline.
From what I've seen, this was a last minute change to pacify what is no doubt a very vocal minority. Of all the proposals and ideas, I'd never seen this one until it was announced. Reading through some of the discussions over the past several months on this has just been baffling to me. I live in PA where all comers can get a buck tag, a bear tag, fall and spring turkey statewide, resident or NR. Everyone can apply for elk for $12, no other fee. If you get drawn you pay $25 or $250 for a license res or NR. No one gets a second buck tag. Then I see a state like this where residents can get 3 or 4 or more buck tags that think that's not enough so they need to knock down NR archers to save the deer. It's just a baffling concept to me.
There will be less NR licenses sold, and it will cost SD some money. Whether it's enough to make a difference, who knows.
Since I reside in SD I am a little biased in my opinion, but this is my take on the situation. I am an avid archery and rifle deer hunter. The SDGFP and/or Commission has always been a revenue driven license distributor. Over the year the revenue stream has lead to excessive license allocations. Something needed to be done to stabilize the herd after a serious population decline a few years ago and most residents saw difficulty in acquiring the "preferred'" license and the complaints grew louder. The state has now made some decisions that were highly unpopular with most avid hunters and were driven to appease the growing number of complaints from residents not drawing resident deer tags. The decisions made; reducing the number of tags you can apply for in the first draws, would supposedly give everyone a great chance of drawing at least their preferred tag each year, which will not happen. After the first draw nearly every anydeer or buck tag will be drawn and if you do not draw in round one forget getting a "buck" tag as a resident. The loss of opportunity to draw multiple "buck " tags or at least your most preferred tag has lead to a group of residents feeling the state should address other perceived population issues and that being basically unlimited deer tags in several draws for residents and NR applicants. For years there has been little or no limiting of deer licenses for archery, mentor, youth, muzzleloader and maybe others. Yes, many of these are primarily antlerless tags but do effect the population along with the stress on land use. Now land usage has become a big issue and is truly an issue for all hunters. Over the years the areas I hunt are becoming more and more saturated with hunters and this leads to some Res vs NR complaints with many claims of the crowding coming from NR hunters where the truth is more likely crowding is caused by both Res and NR hunters as land access is more difficult each year. I do agree with limiting the the number of tags allocated for NR draws and what the percentage should be? Probably should be reflective of what every other state does that being "X" percentage goes to a drawing for NR apps. It takes multiple preference points to draw "my" unit and I feel expecting the same for a NR is proper. I also believe unlimited anterless tags needs to stop. I am not suggesting not allowing youth hunters an opportunity to hunt, but the numbers need to be managed. Now making a NR wait a month to hunt, I do not support as I would feel upset if I was subjected to the same going to another state. There were several options considered by the commission and IMO the decisions made were knee-jerk and were throwing a bone to the complaining population. Again just my opinion and I hope that our hunting opportunities are not evaporating no matter were we reside.
beagle001
Well-known member
SDhunter, I like your honesty. I know there are some issues with the draws for residents. From the outside looking in, and what I witnessed my one and only time rifle hunting there, one of the biggest obstacles (right or wrong I don’t know) is the amount of East River folks that head west and the amount of folks that apply for any deer tags when the chances are slim and a whitetail only tag would do. Nothing wrong with that, and I can’t say I wouldn’t do the same, but common sense tells me this is a pretty big hindrance to the overall system, adding to the squeaky wheel.
What is the perfect scenario? I’m not sure. I think it does start with a full mandatory compliance of deer registration. Then there aren’t any formulas to guess numbers. Insiders at GFP could see precisely how many non residents tagged out, how many residents did the same, and (maybe) get a handle on if locals are getting scooted out of opportunity in their own county or what some of the dynamics are.
What is the perfect scenario? I’m not sure. I think it does start with a full mandatory compliance of deer registration. Then there aren’t any formulas to guess numbers. Insiders at GFP could see precisely how many non residents tagged out, how many residents did the same, and (maybe) get a handle on if locals are getting scooted out of opportunity in their own county or what some of the dynamics are.
beagle001
Well-known member
I would also like it to be known that I’m being critical and maybe a little scorned because, probably like others, I truly love South Dakota and have had some of my most memorable hunts there. I had hoped that to someday “break-in” my son to western hunting with a SoDak trip. That is still a possibility, but it also seems less welcoming, and I’d hate for a lower quality experience to negatively shade my memories, or worse, his introduction.
Keeptrying
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2016
- Messages
- 678
I am no fan of SDGFP, but honestly they are just trying to bring the state in-line with the other mule deer opportunities. Where else can you get a guaranteed tag to hunt MD or WT for $286 October through December? On millions of acres of public land.
I get that people don't like change, but really, the state is waaaay behind in controlling this. Let's be real, people lie on harvest data reports because they know it draws attention to specific areas. Not saying anyone in this thread, but we all know it goes on. Nobody has any idea how many deer are actually harvested by archers, or rifle hunters for that matter.
As far as driving 2 more hours for a better deal I think you'll have to try harder than that. MT, WY, CO? The first two are draws only, more expensive, and CO may be as well, IDK. AZ is another planet, and ID has some very real challenges.
I get people are pissed, it's natural, but comment to SDGFP in a respectful manner and hope for the best. Either way, it is still a great opportunity.
I get that people don't like change, but really, the state is waaaay behind in controlling this. Let's be real, people lie on harvest data reports because they know it draws attention to specific areas. Not saying anyone in this thread, but we all know it goes on. Nobody has any idea how many deer are actually harvested by archers, or rifle hunters for that matter.
As far as driving 2 more hours for a better deal I think you'll have to try harder than that. MT, WY, CO? The first two are draws only, more expensive, and CO may be as well, IDK. AZ is another planet, and ID has some very real challenges.
I get people are pissed, it's natural, but comment to SDGFP in a respectful manner and hope for the best. Either way, it is still a great opportunity.
Change is fine, but the reality is this really has nothing to do with management. They are caving to a group of residents who feel there are too many NR, which fine if you want less NR then do your share to make up for the loss income. However don't present it as a management tactic because the NR archery hunters are a small portion of the overall hunting population and harvests in SD.
Keeptrying
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2016
- Messages
- 678
Why should SD be so unique in what they offer? No other state allows what we do and making changes is in order. Don't like it? Hunt somewhere else. Or stay home and yell at your computer screen.
SD will still allow an OTC archery deer tag to non-residents with a little planning. Sorry we don't give you everything you believe we owe you. It is still a really nice opportunity.
In case you didn't notice the changes to deer hunting in SD involve residents as well and will into the future.
Keeptrying…, get it,...haha...Your last sentence is not accurate at all. Residents get to hunt the entire archery season in SD on PUBLIC LANDS OWNED BY EVERYONE IN THE USA, and Non-residents can NOT hunt the land that they own for the first month of the season. I'm guessing that most of the NR would be supportive of changes made that were truly beneficial to the herd and were working toward a management plan. However this rule change is solely a jab by the Rs at the NRs, and nothing more, because the Rs think the NRs are killing all of THEIR deer on THEIR public land.
beagle001
Well-known member
That’s the plan.
LopeHunter
Well-known member
Ah, the tradition of the West kicking sand in the eyes of NR continues. AK guide rules, WY wilderness rules and NM state trust lands. Well, SD rules apply unless the NR is on private because in ND deer would never wander onto public during August.
SD could accomplish a reduction in hunting pressure with a split season approach that applies equally to R and NR but then one of those NR might out-hunt a R. That would make R very sad. Not sure what happens if one R out-hunts another R though when you reward whining then the whining sometimes keeps on going. Perhaps next great idea for fairness will limit access to public lands to only R which live in the same county as those public lands. Winner winner chicken dinner. More us vs them. And we know "them" are weasels with beady eyes that steal babies off back porches.
Here is my hot proposal to keep those evil NR in line in all our states. Restrict animal size for NR: Come to our state and hunt up to 240" class bull elk with up to 4 points per side! We offer the largest 1/3 curl or less ram hunts in the West! Bull moose up to 20" spreads are awaiting your arrival! Mule deer forkies that will cause your heart to skip a beat!
NR, the enemy of God-fearing R in every state. It is time to take action before another critter falls to the NR bullet.
SD could accomplish a reduction in hunting pressure with a split season approach that applies equally to R and NR but then one of those NR might out-hunt a R. That would make R very sad. Not sure what happens if one R out-hunts another R though when you reward whining then the whining sometimes keeps on going. Perhaps next great idea for fairness will limit access to public lands to only R which live in the same county as those public lands. Winner winner chicken dinner. More us vs them. And we know "them" are weasels with beady eyes that steal babies off back porches.
Here is my hot proposal to keep those evil NR in line in all our states. Restrict animal size for NR: Come to our state and hunt up to 240" class bull elk with up to 4 points per side! We offer the largest 1/3 curl or less ram hunts in the West! Bull moose up to 20" spreads are awaiting your arrival! Mule deer forkies that will cause your heart to skip a beat!
NR, the enemy of God-fearing R in every state. It is time to take action before another critter falls to the NR bullet.
Wow, a little upset. The "don't like it, go hunt another somewhere else" comment possibly the most worn out comment on these forums. Maybe you missed this part of my post "They are caving to a group of residents who feel there are too many NR, which fine if you want less NR then do your share to make up for the loss income. " If R don't want NR to come to the state that's their choice and they vote for the officials that make that choice. But don't tell me one thing when it's pretty obvious it's another. As I stated be prepared to make up for that loss income, I'm sure you will be and even a small group of other people will too will be happy to do that but the majority will not. I also never said anything about SD owing me or anyone which you seem to come out of no where with that. If they really wanted to "manage the heard" they would start with the R and NR rifle tags which they did make changes to but not a reduction. But no them darn NR archery hunters are killing all the deer. I'm perfectly fine with change, reductions, price increases, etc, that's nothing new to me. Just don't lie to me about what the reason is and make it sound like I have it sooo good.
Last edited:
