# Amy-Hunt Draw odds



## PeakHunter (Sep 9, 2011)

Hey Amy, do you know when they are going to release the draw odds for this year. I know in 2010 they released them on Aug 11th and last year they released them on Aug 9th?


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

PeakHunter said:


> Hey Amy, do you know when they are going to release the draw odds for this year. I know in 2010 they released them on Aug 11th and last year they released them on Aug 9th?


I'll check on this today, PeakHunter.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

PeakHunter said:


> Hey Amy, do you know when they are going to release the draw odds for this year. I know in 2010 they released them on Aug 11th and last year they released them on Aug 9th?


I followed up with a couple of people this morning, and the draw odds will be online next week. I'll post a link here as soon as they are available.


----------



## PeakHunter (Sep 9, 2011)

Thanks Amy!!


----------



## sharpshooter (Nov 17, 2010)

Amy, help us out on the cougar odds please. It's like they just gave up on them. I believe we are two years behind on them.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

sharpshooter said:


> Amy, help us out on the cougar odds please. It's like they just gave up on them. I believe we are two years behind on them.


I'm out of the office today, sharpshooter, but I'll check on this when I'm back on Monday.


----------



## sharpshooter (Nov 17, 2010)

Thanks for your help. I want to see if I have set the record yet for most points without drawing.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

I'm still waiting on the big game odds (probably just another day or two), but I was able to track down the cougar information, sharpshooter. You'll find it under the "Cougar drawing results" heading. Thanks for your patience and for letting me know it was missing.


----------



## Bears Butt (Sep 12, 2007)

Amy you are such a great person. I'm sure this is not part of your job either, you are doing it just for us and I for one thank you very much. How can I put you in for a special award or promotion?


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

Bears Butt said:


> I'm sure this is not part of your job either, you are doing it just for us and I for one thank you very much. How can I put you in for a special award or promotion?


  That's really nice of you, BB, but keeping the website up to date is actually part of my job. And hanging out here from time to time is definitely its own reward!


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Amy,
Did they get uploaded yet?


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

HJB said:


> Amy,
> Did they get uploaded yet?


I checked on it Wednesday, HJB, and the person who was working on it said it was close to done. I haven't seen it come over yet, though. I just sent a follow-up email to check on the status. As soon as my team gets it, we'll post it to the website and let you know.


----------



## HJB (May 22, 2008)

Thanks, I appreciate the help. It will be a header on the DWR website when uploaded correct? So if I just keep checking the home page, I should know when it comes up?


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

HJB said:


> Thanks, I appreciate the help. It will be a header on the DWR website when uploaded correct? So if I just keep checking the home page, I should know when it comes up?


It will actually be on the Big game animals page under the "Big game statistics & drawing odds" heading. And I just heard back from my contact: it sounds like she'll have the report to us this afternoon.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

Quick update: The Big Game odds reports are done, and one of my colleagues is working to get them posted. I need to leave because a family member is having surgery this afternoon, so I won't be back online until tonight. I'm guessing the reports will be posted before 5 or 6 p.m., maybe much sooner. If you happen to see them before I can get back to post, please feel free to drop a note in this thread. Thanks very much!


----------



## RedNekFishR (May 22, 2012)

Odds are now posted
http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hu ... -game.html


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

RedNekFishR said:


> Odds are now posted
> http://wildlife.utah.gov/dwr/hunting/hu ... -game.html


Thanks for following up, RedNekFishR. I really appreciate it!


----------



## Hunter Tom (Sep 23, 2007)

Why in the world does DWR not add the hunt type (muzzy, archery, rifle) to any of their draw tables?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Hunter Tom said:


> Why in the world does DWR not add the hunt type (muzzy, archery, rifle) to any of their draw tables?


And the species and unit? I know we can just look it up in the Application Guidebook, but the numbers change from year to year and they aren't in numerical order in the Guidebook and some of us may not still have a copy of it. Plus, what happens when the Guidebooks all go online like the Antlerless?


----------



## MuleyCrazy (Jun 6, 2010)

Thanks for posting this, I guess it's good to know how bad my odds were.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Who would waste 17 pts on antelope island deer? Lol they could have any tag in the state except that one. Oops


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Amy said:


> Bears Butt said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure this is not part of your job either, you are doing it just for us and I for one thank you very much. How can I put you in for a special award or promotion?
> ...


Sorry, Amy, but I'm afraid this isn't going to be one of them!

On another forum, there have been a couple of complaints about being passed over even with maximum bonus points, ie; hunt #1580, the other one unknown so far. In any case, just to see what's up, I got to looking at some pronghorn hunts and noticed some "errors" in the system or in the typing of the results, I'm not sure which. I haven't looked into other hunts, but I suspect I'd see the same thing.

5002 has the required 2 bonus point tags, but they didn't both go to the top group as they should have. Although all 3 top applicants received tags, 2 of them were listed as regular tags, thus the second bonus point tag ended up in the next group.

5008, with only 2 tags didn't even list a required bonus point tag. Although, again, the top applicant received a tag, both tags are listed as regular tags.

5013, Only lists 6 bonus point tags when there should be 8. Again, the top applicants all received tags, but the way it's listed leads me to believe the regular tags are drawn before the bonus point tags. Is that the case, or is it a typo?

I don't see that anyone was passed over in the pronghorn hunts, (#1580 is another matter) but it is confusing and could lead to some complaints.

I know fixing this isn't also yet another part of your busy job, but I also know you readily pass things on to the folks that do. Thanks, You've more than earned your title! Lee


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

Thanks for following up on this, Lee. I've forwarded your specific questions and concerns to the individuals who put together the reports. I also included the links to this thread and the one on MM. I'll let you know what I hear.


----------



## highcountryfever (Aug 24, 2009)

ok, here is something I don't understand. Looking at the general deer any weapon for GN-1556 - Wasatch West, the total quota is 4500 with 4081 to residents and 419 to non-res. It shows that only 57 non residents put in for the hunt and they all got a tag. (under quota) It also shows that 4093 (over quota) residents got tags, but the combined quota of 4500 tags was not reached. 

This leaves me with 2 questions. First - why not give the remaining non-res tags to residents that applied for the unit? There was already 12 more permits given than the quota allowed. There were 256 unsuccessful residents. Even if they were all given tags, the unit would have still been under the total quota. (4406 total applicants to 4500 total quota)

Second: if there were 4150 permits given out (Res and non-res) and the quota was for 4500 then why are there not 350 tags left over and available on the remaining permit lists?

Someone please enlighten me.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

They were supposed to take Lifetime Licensees out of the pool, which should be the reason why there are less tags in the rifle draw pool.


----------



## CP1 (Oct 1, 2007)

AMY, Heres another to pass along. in my gourp of 2 we had 7.5 points on paper, rounded down would give 7 points as of 2011 and we did not draw wasatch archery elk. according to this report anyone with 7 or more points was gauanteed a tag.


----------



## dibb03 (Dec 17, 2007)

Ok, I have one for you to pass along as well Amy. Book Cliffs Archery tag, hunt 1009. There are 34 applicants in the 8 point category and 33 drew bonus permits. However, 8 people in the 7 point category drew bonus permits. How was that 1 person with 8 bonus points passed over? That does not make sense. Shouldn't that applicant receieve one of the bonus permits also?


----------



## jasonwayne191 (Jun 11, 2012)

This whole bonus/pref point draw is so confusing to newbies like me. Well, me for sure! ugggh!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

CP1 said:


> AMY, Heres another to pass along. in my gourp of 2 we had 7.5 points on paper, rounded down would give 7 points as of 2011 and we did not draw wasatch archery elk. according to this report anyone with 7 or more points was gauanteed a tag.


Maybe you are looking at how many points you had after the draw or have now. If you are going to use that data you need to look at how many points you had before you went into the drawing. This is a common mistake people make and i dont know if its a mistake you made or not. The other senerio is if you were unlucky and you were the last guy to draw in the bonus point category and there was one permit left and you were in a group you loose. One draw back to group applicants


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

dibb03 said:


> Ok, I have one for you to pass along as well Amy. Book Cliffs Archery tag, hunt 1009. There are 34 applicants in the 8 point category and 33 drew bonus permits. However, 8 people in the 7 point category drew bonus permits. How was that 1 person with 8 bonus points passed over? That does not make sense. Shouldn't that applicant receieve one of the bonus permits also?


Read my post above. This explains one way that person could have been over looked. He may have also turned in the tag.


----------



## dibb03 (Dec 17, 2007)

sw, those points do make sense. However, none of them pertain to the applicant in question. The applicant currently has 9 points now after this draw, he did not put in for the hunt as a group applicant. He put in alone. The reason I know all this information is because the applicant is my brother. When he didn't draw we though more people with his point total must have put in and he was one of the unlucky ones. But now seeing that 8 bonus permits went to applicants with 7 points and he was the only 8 point holder that got passed over kinda ticks him off. With all that information it does not make any sense as to why he did not draw. Card were not declined, application was fine (as evidence, he now has 9 points).


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Maybe he put in the wrong hunt number but correct area. The division has made the draw about as complicated as it can possibly be with the hunt numbers.

It would be so easy to apply if they got rid of the numbers and said area and weapon.


----------



## MarkM (Sep 7, 2007)

Are the Dedicated hunter draw odds part of this report? I am not seeing them.

Mark


----------



## CP1 (Oct 1, 2007)

Scott, 7.5 points averaged down to 7 points in 2011. I always project from whats actually showing up on my points before the draw. kind of sucks since I planned on this hunt and only applied for points in most other states. atleast I can hunt the front in a month. So tecnically the DWR odds should say that 2 people with 7 points did not draw......


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Cp1 That sucks.

Every year i apply the further behind i get. I have
12 archery deer points.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> Cp1 That sucks.
> 
> Every year i apply the further behind i get. I have
> 12 archery deer points.


Amen to that. Its a loosing battle year to year.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

I heard back from one of our licensing specialists on a few of these, but I need to chat with him about the others today. Here's what I have so far:

*Hunt 1580* is the Plateau, Thousand Lakes hunt. There were many Lifetime License holders and Dedicated Hunters who wanted to hunt this unit, and it had a low permit quota. Because of these circumstances, permits for this hunt choice were allocated within the early rounds of the drawing. The numbers listed are all Lifetime License holders.

*Hunt 5008* had an original resident quota of 1 and a nonresident quota of 1. With only one permit in each category, there isn't a bonus point round. There were no nonresident applicants, so the second permit was issued to a resident.

*Hunt 5002* had 5 permits, and 2 were offered in the bonus point round. The top point level was 3 points and there were three people. The first person to draw was an "individual" applicant. That left 1 bonus point round tag to issue. The other two people at the 3-point level applied as a "group of two." Because there was only one bonus point permit left to offer, they were skipped, and the permit went to a 2-point holder. Then in the regular round, the group of two had a good enough draw number, and there were enough permits for their group (3 permits remaining in the regular round), so they were successful. So, there was not an error in this report. It was just a bit more complicated because of the group application.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Amy said:


> *Hunt 1580* is the Plateau, ... The numbers listed are all Lifetime License holders.


HAhahahaa where are all the people who said their werent enough lifetime license holders to make a difference? They can do this every single year until they die (which most life'ers I know are still pretty young guys).

Thanks Option2!

-DallanC


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Amy, thanks for the explanation. I have a feeling that most of, if not all, the "errors" were actually drawn correctly... they just look weird on the odds report because of all the scenarios that play out.

As to the Lifetime License Holders. This is a major issue. It only took one day after the odds were released for some pretty major injustice to be found. DWR should fix this in the future. Not even the Lifetime License Holders can honestly say they feel this is fair and equitable.

Grizzly


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

grizzly said:


> As to the Lifetime License Holders. This is a major issue. It only took one day after the odds were released for some pretty major injustice to be found. DWR should fix this in the future. Not even the Lifetime License Holders can honestly say they feel this is fair and equitable.
> 
> Grizzly


It is fair and equitable--they spent the cash and bought a LIFETIME LICENSE--they are owed a deer tag and they should get their choice of general units. It's obligated to them and if the division does not oblige and uphold its part of the deal you would see lawsuits. The DWR cannot force the lifetime license folks into units they do not want to hunt--otherwise what would stop them from putting all lifetime license holders into the west desert west unit and calling it good--that was not what was promised and that is not what will happen--the division made this bed back in the day and now we get to live with it--oh well, suck it up and take your medicine like a man! 

Full Disclosure--> I do NOT have a lifetime license but I do know what a contract is. This world is not "fair" get used to it


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

The lifetime license does NOT stipulate that a hunter gets to hunt the area of his/her choice...it just stipulates a tag.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

+1


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Airborne, I don't have a dog in this fight. I just buy preference points for General Deer. 

But there are kids that never got the option of buying a Lifetime License that need to be taken into consideration. I am speaking for them.

Obviously you aren't a lawyer if you pull the "lawsuit" card. First of all, I haven't reviewed the exact verbiage of the "Lifetime License Contract", but I am suspicious that it includes language that allows for an escape clause by the DWR if management changes are needed. Secondly, even if a private individual sued and won a judgement against the State of Utah, which is very hard to do, the most "damages" that could be claimed was the original cost of the Lifetime License (minus a prorated usage amount for licenses issued over past years). In the real world, almost no judge will rule in favor of "specific enforcement" which would be the ruling required to force the DWR to do something it didn't want to do.

Lawsuits really aren't a threat to the DWR in this type of situation. And I promise you the DWR knows it.

Grizzly


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> The lifetime license does NOT stipulate that a hunter gets to hunt the area of his/her choice...it just stipulates a tag.


Maybe so--but if that is the case why doesn't the DWR take advantage of this and make all of the LL holders hunt in the salt flats?



grizzly said:


> But there are kids that never got the option of buying a Lifetime License that need to be taken into consideration. I am speaking for them.


I was too young to purchase Microsoft stock when it was an IPO--would you please speak on my behalf :lol:



grizzly said:


> Obviously you aren't a lawyer if you pull the "lawsuit" card


yep--just an accountant



grizzly said:


> In the real world, almost no judge will rule in favor of "specific enforcement" which would be the ruling required to force the DWR to do something it didn't want to do


If you know the future and specifically how judges and juries will rule in certain cases with very little knowledge of the specifics of the case, well then buddy you better be a Billionaire because that is one heck of a skill.

I know that LL holders can choose their unit and I don't see any push against this --maybe another pet project for UWC to take up. I am not saying that it is fair--just that I can see the side of the LL holders more so than myself who does not have one. But this country is all about making things 'Fair' so who knows--it may change, some pigs are more equal than others ya know. :roll:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

There was talk at the RAC and WB meetings last year that they were not going to limit the amount of LL holders per unit because they thought they would spread out pretty evenly and if they didn't they could look at it in the future. So I guess this leads me to believe they could limit LL holders in each unit kind of like the DH tags.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Airborne said:


> wyoming2utah said:
> 
> 
> > The lifetime license does NOT stipulate that a hunter gets to hunt the area of his/her choice...it just stipulates a tag.
> ...


Probably because there aren't any deer in the salt flats...the DWR has no problem with trying to give all hunters a successful experience. Despite what you may or may not think, the DWR is not out to screw anybody over...!

We also live in the age of entitlement where people feel entitled to things that they do not necessarily deserve...what makes you think that lifetime license holders deserve or are entitled to hunt the unit or area of their choice? Should they also be entitled to hunt units like the paunsagaunt or the henry's; afterall, don't they have a lifetime license and shouldn't they be able to hunt the area of their choice?


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> Probably because there aren't any deer in the salt flats...the DWR has no problem with trying to give all hunters a successful experience. Despite what you may or may not think, the DWR is not out to screw anybody over...!
> 
> We also live in the age of entitlement where people feel entitled to things that they do not necessarily deserve...what makes you think that lifetime license holders deserve or are entitled to hunt the unit or area of their choice? Should they also be entitled to hunt units like the paunsagaunt or the henry's; afterall, don't they have a lifetime license and shouldn't they be able to hunt the area of their choice?


Exactly--you guys feel wronged that the LL holders get a tag of their choice each year- cause its not fair--cry me a river you entitled noobs!

LL holders have known from day one that they get a general tag--your limited tag argument is a red herring--and a mighty ridiculous one at that--this is like arguing with junior high kids.

They are entitled to the tag because they bought that entitlement!--oh and they have had their choice of tag since they bought their License--for well over a decade they can hunt every year where they wish--this is what is known as precedent and it matters! Seriously fellas--how old are you guys?


----------



## RichardClarke (Nov 5, 2011)

Airbonne, Thankfully you are just a bean counter and only play an attorney on the internet. Mr. Contract feel free to show us where it states LL holders have a choice of hunting units. Refrain from replying until you can show us in the contract where it states they are allowed their choice. Precedent matters alright; hmm tell that to Native Americans!!


----------



## SureShot (Oct 2, 2007)

Do you know what these draw statistics tell me? It tells me there are a whole bunch of lifetime license holders that are getting set up for a huge disappointment in their hunt this year.

Let's remember that the unit went from limited entry to general season for a reason: poor herd.

Then, consider that less than 40 buck tags were issued across all three hunt types for that unit last year when it was limited entry.

Then, consider that more than 400 buck tags were issued across all three hunt types for that unit this year.

Sure, there may be a few nice bucks hanging around and a few lucky hunters will go home happy. But, I predict it will be one of the poorer units in terms of success rate this year and there's going to be a whole bunch of lifetime license holders that learn a painful lesson.

EDIT: I looked at the numbers closer. In their earlier documents, it said 400 permits were approved for the unit. But, according to the draw statistics, only 230 were issued. So, maybe it won't be so bad. But, I think my theory is still correct.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

RichardClarke said:


> Airbonne, Thankfully you are just a bean counter and only play an attorney on the internet. Mr. Contract feel free to show us where it states LL holders have a choice of hunting units. Refrain from replying until you can show us in the contract where it states they are allowed their choice. Precedent matters alright; hmm tell that to Native Americans!!


Dearest Mr Dick Clarke,

Well this internet advocate took about 2 minutes to find the rules about LL holders, hope you got to bed early so you can make it to homeroom tomorrow morning--dang kids wasting my time. Oh and look at the title of the rule--ENTITLEMENT!

I am reminded of my favorite Jay-Z song--with some minor changes

"I aint passed the bar but I know a little bit"

"I've got 99 problems but your level of intelligent discussion aint one"

This is me gushing 8)

Keep in mind that the wildlife board has the authority to vote and change this rule, but it has been in force for almost 20 years! Not to say that it won't happen but the push back from the LL holders will be fierce. Not to mention that the demographic and involvement of these individuals in the Utah hunting world is considerable. Lawsuits are always an option! God Bless America

Please feel free to disagree with me, but stop grasping at straws and throwing out red herrings, the Native Americans in this country have been abused enough :!:

*R657-17-3. Lifetime License Entitlement.*

(1) (a) A permanent lifetime license card shall be issued to lifetime licensees in lieu of an annual hunting, and fishing license.

(b) The issuance of a permanent lifetime license card does not authorize a lifetime licensee to all hunting privileges. The lifetime licensee is subject to the requirements in Subsection R657-17-1(2).

(2) (a) Each year, a lifetime licensee who is eligible to hunt big game may receive without charge, a permit for the unit of their choice for one of the following general deer hunts:

(i) archery buck deer;

(ii) any weapon buck deer; or

(iii) muzzleloader buck deer.

(b) Effective January 1, 2012 all lifetime license holders must initially select a general season hunting unit during the Big Game application period as established in the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game.

(3) Sales of lifetime hunting and fishing licenses may not be refunded, except as provided in Section 23-19-38.

(4) Lifetime hunting and fishing licenses are not transferable.

(5) Lifetime hunting and fishing licenses are no longer for sale as of March 1, 1994.

(6)(a) Lifetime license holders may participate in the Dedicated Hunter Program.

(b) Upon entering the Dedicated Hunter Program, the lifetime license holder agrees to forego any rights to receive a buck deer permit for the general archery, general any weapon or general muzzleloader deer hunts as provided in Section 23-19-17.5 during enrollment in the Dedicated Hunter Program.


----------



## UtahMountainMan (Jul 20, 2010)

Actually, if I was going to argue against this from a legal perspective I think there is room for debate.

*(2) (a) Each year, a lifetime licensee who is eligible to hunt big game may receive without charge, a permit for the unit of their choice for one of the following general deer hunts:

(i) archery buck deer;

(ii) any weapon buck deer; or

(iii) muzzleloader buck deer.

(b) Effective January 1, 2012 all lifetime license holders must initially select a general season hunting unit during the Big Game application period as established in the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game.
*

It states that the LL holder may receive a permit for the unit of their choice. I could see a scenario where the DWR limits the amount of LL tags issued per general weapon per unit. They would then require LL holders to choose a 1st choice, 2nd choice, and 3rd choice unit. If a LL holder chooses a weapon/hunt for their 1st choice that has already been drawn to the predetermined number of LL holders, their 2nd choice would then attempt to be drawn. If the 2nd choice is also full, then they are automatically awarded their 3rd choice even if the 3rd choice is technically at the limit of LL holder tags.

This way, it abides with the language/entitlement description in the contract by awarding them a "unit of their choice". They simply have to choose 3 units, in order of preference, and they are still guaranteed a tag for AT LEAST their 3rd pick.

There has already been a tweak to the system by requiring them to "initially" choose a unit starting in 2012.

That phrasing of "initially" definitely opens the door for the DWR to make further adjustments to the system based upon the fact that the general season regions that were set prior to 1994 have now changed to 30 general season units.

It is obvious that LL holders were guaranteed a tag of their choice for life. I dont think that it clarifies that they only get to choose ONE and they get their FIRST CHOICE for ever. That is not specified because it did not NEED to be specified when the language of the contract was written.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Airborne said:


> LL holders have known from day one that they get a general tag--your limited tag argument is a red herring--and a mighty ridiculous one at that--this is like arguing with junior high kids.
> 
> They are entitled to the tag because they bought that entitlement!--oh and they have had their choice of tag since they bought their License--for well over a decade they can hunt every year where they wish--this is what is known as precedent and it matters! Seriously fellas--how old are you guys?


Huh? Do you realize how much hunting and hunting units and management has changed since 1994? Do we even have general units anymore? What about units that have switched from general to LE like the Henry's...? When were the Henry's last a general unit? Management changes and so will the LL holders...

...the rules you posted about LL holders were not from the original 1994 contract; they were written up because of the management changes to deer units.

Also, LL holders are guaranteed a tag--maybe even of their choice--but they are going to be limited as to what units they get to choose from.


Airborne said:


> for well over a decade they can hunt every year where they wish--this is what is known as precedent and it matters!


No, they cannot hunt wherever they wish...again they must choose from designated units and since 1994 those units have changed and may change more. The WB has the authority to severely limit these guys...


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

The 'may' in may receive isn't the same as 'may, I please'. It is more like if they fulfill their obligations; such as sending their request in on time, keeping their address information current with the UDWR, not violating the game laws in Utah or any other state, then they have fulfilled their obligations, and the UDWR is obligated to give them a tag. If they are convicted of a game violation in another state that participates in the Wildlife Violator Compact, then they don't get their tag in Utah.



> R657-17-4. General Deer Permits.
> (1) *The Division will issue a general buck deer permit to each lifetime licensee prior to the big game general hunting season, provided:*
> 
> (a) a current Lifetime Questionnaire has been completed prior to the application deadline, identifying the lifetime licensee's general season unit and hunt type choice, or according to the recent lifetime licensee record; and
> ...


The UDWR is obligated to issue a deer tag to the lifetime license holder, as long as the lifetime license holder fulfills his obligations.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Mr WyomingtoUtah,

First you stated that LL holders cannot choose their units, that was a lie and I proved you wrong. Then you stated this:



wyoming2utah said:


> No, they cannot hunt wherever they wish...again they must choose from designated units and since 1994 those units have changed and may change more. The WB has the authority to severely limit these guys...


They get to choose a general unit--been saying it the whole time bud, the stated rules back me up.

You then changed your initial argument and are now on the bandwagon that stuff changes and that the wildlife board can change the rules and I completely agree with you. I think they may have a tough time doing so, I stated as much with this comment:



Airborne said:


> Keep in mind that the wildlife board has the authority to vote and change this rule, but it has been in force for almost 20 years! Not to say that it won't happen but the push back from the LL holders will be fierce. Not to mention that the demographic and involvement of these individuals in the Utah hunting world is considerable. Lawsuits are always an option! God Bless America


Thank you Fishrmn and UtahMountainMan for good logical arguments as to how the rules may change in the future, Its nice to see. Maybe WyomingtoUtah could take some notes on how to add to a conversation and not try to debate straw men, I doubt he knows what this means so Mr wyomingtoutah please give this a read before your next posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I just hope you can understand the words with more than four syllables


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

> *R657-17-3. Lifetime License Entitlement.*
> 
> (1) (a) A permanent lifetime license card shall be issued to lifetime licensees in lieu of an annual hunting, and fishing license.
> 
> ...


The easiest work around for the state is to eliminate the general season deer hunts. In effect that has already happened, it only requires slight change of language and all of the lifetime licenses are no longer valid. If we want to talk precendent, we have now had many years of LE deer units that lifetime license holders have never been eligible for.

This language above is not reflective of the original contract, I would be interested to know what that contract looks like.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> > *R657-17-3. Lifetime License Entitlement.*
> >
> > (1) (a) A permanent lifetime license card shall be issued to lifetime licensees in lieu of an annual hunting, and fishing license.
> >
> ...


Exactly...!


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Dahlmer said:


> The easiest work around for the state is to eliminate the general season deer hunts. In effect that has already happened, it only requires slight change of language and all of the lifetime licenses are no longer valid. If we want to talk precendent, we have now had many years of LE deer units that lifetime license holders have never been eligible for.
> 
> This language above is not reflective of the original contract, I would be interested to know what that contract looks like.


At which point they could then issue every lifetime license holder a general season tag and require everyone else to participate in a draw for the remaining LE permits. I really doubt that they will do a great deal to limit, or restrict the lifetime license holders. As for their age? I know a lot more 50 year olds and older who have lifetime licenses than under 50.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

I know it's taken some time for me to get back to everyone on this, and I appreciate your patience. Here are a few answers:



Hunter Tom said:


> Why in the world does DWR not add the hunt type (muzzy, archery, rifle) to any of their draw tables?





elkfromabove said:


> And the species and unit?


I talked to one of our licensing specialists, and he indicated that it's mostly a matter of space in the general odds report. If we add three more columns, it will really crowd the page. That doesn't mean we won't look at ways to make it more user friendly next year, but I can't promise specifics right now.

In the individual species reports, we already include the unit name, and it might not be that difficult to add the weapon type - we'll look into it.



elkfromabove said:


> 5013, Only lists 6 bonus point tags when there should be 8. Again, the top applicants all received tags, but the way it's listed leads me to believe the regular tags are drawn before the bonus point tags. Is that the case, or is it a typo?


I haven't heard back on this one yet, Lee, but I'll let you know as soon as I do.



highcountryfever said:


> ok, here is something I don't understand. Looking at the general deer any weapon for GN-1556 - Wasatch West, the total quota is 4500 with 4081 to residents and 419 to non-res. It shows that only 57 non residents put in for the hunt and they all got a tag. (under quota) It also shows that 4093 (over quota) residents got tags, but the combined quota of 4500 tags was not reached.
> 
> This leaves me with 2 questions. First - why not give the remaining non-res tags to residents that applied for the unit? There was already 12 more permits given than the quota allowed. There were 256 unsuccessful residents. Even if they were all given tags, the unit would have still been under the total quota. (4406 total applicants to 4500 total quota) Second: if there were 4150 permits given out (Res and non-res) and the quota was for 4500 then why are there not 350 tags left over and available on the remaining permit lists?


This one is pretty straightforward. The odds report only reflects hunters' first choices in the drawing. The 350 permits that were left over after first choices were considered went to hunters who selected this unit as their second or third choice. The remaining non-resident permits _did_ go to residents, and the 256 who were unsuccessful likely drew permits in earlier rounds of the drawing (possibly Dedicated Hunter, Limited Entry or Once in a Lifetime permits).



cp1 said:


> AMY, Heres another to pass along. in my gourp of 2 we had 7.5 points on paper, rounded down would give 7 points as of 2011 and we did not draw wasatch archery elk. according to this report anyone with 7 or more points was gauanteed a tag.





dibb03 said:


> Ok, I have one for you to pass along as well Amy. Book Cliffs Archery tag, hunt 1009. There are 34 applicants in the 8 point category and 33 drew bonus permits. However, 8 people in the 7 point category drew bonus permits. How was that 1 person with 8 bonus points passed over? That does not make sense. Shouldn't that applicant receieve one of the bonus permits also?


PMs sent, cp1 and dibb03. Our licensing specialist would like to follow up on these in more detail and needs to speak to you and your brother, respectively.



MarkM said:


> Are the Dedicated hunter draw odds part of this report? I am not seeing them.


They are in one of the reports. I've provided an explanation in this thread.



grizzly said:


> Amy, thanks for the explanation. I have a feeling that most of, if not all, the "errors" were actually drawn correctly... they just look weird on the odds report because of all the scenarios that play out.


Bingo! There are any number of scenarios and complicating factors. (Groups spring to mind.) There's also the fact that this report only reflects hunters' first choices. If you don't know that, then some of the data will certainly look strange. I hope this helps!


----------



## SureShot (Oct 2, 2007)

Amy, your responses and customer service are outstanding. I hope your bosses understand and appreciate what a tremendous effect you're having on the public perception of the DWR.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

SureShot said:


> Amy, your responses and customer service are outstanding. I hope your bosses understand and appreciate what a tremendous effect you're having on the public perception of the DWR.


+10000000


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Thanks, Amy. Oh, that all government employees were as efficient as you and I, before I retired. Indeed, I did overlook the group applications and the second, third, fourth and fifth choices. I guess this shows how complicated and misunderstood our draw system can be.


----------



## Amy (Jan 22, 2009)

Thanks for the kind words, everyone, but I get a lot of behind-the-scenes help from our biologists, licensing personnel, conservation officers and guidebook committee. They are so willing to help with questions and don't even visibly cringe when they see me headed their way.  It's definitely a team effort! Speaking of which, I received an answer from one of our licensing specialists on the question Lee asked about hunt #5013.



elkfromabove said:


> 5013, Only lists 6 bonus point tags when there should be 8. Again, the top applicants all received tags, but the way it's listed leads me to believe the regular tags are drawn before the bonus point tags. Is that the case, or is it a typo?


Here's the answer I received: On hunt 5013, 8 resident permits were offered in the Bonus Point round. Six of the 8 permits were issued to the highest point holders, including two of the 1-point holders. With three of the 1-point holders left (who happened to be in a group of 3), and only 2 permits to give, the group was skipped. Individuals with zero points don't get considered in the bonus point round, so the 2 remaining bonus point permits were added to the other 8 going into the regular round. The group of three drew in this round, along with seven other people who didn't have any points. So, there wasn't an error or a typo, it was just complicated. Hope this helps!


----------

