Quote:
Originally Posted by SCO
Where is bear at 30%? Do not mean to offend you but that is a joke. The last time I looked at the regs there was no limit on the number of resident bear hunters in any particular unit. The only way I could see that you came up with that number is if you were comparing the number of non-resident bear licenses sold compared to resident. If no residents bought a bear license it would be 100%. If every resident that buys a whitetail license bought a bear license it would be 2%.
|
The 30% is a long standing number based on the fact that resident hunters just do not buy tags in sufficient quantity to be impacted. I believe it goes back to the first allocation negotiations.
Quote:
|
As far as moose are concerned along with elk I did state that there are other species as well. I know that our allocations are based on SMU's but most would be asking what that was. I know that skews the 5% if you base it on SMU's but I am glad you brought it up as it helps to clarify why some WMU's have more than 10%. If you take a SMU and it has a 13%, 4%, 3%, 7%, 5%, 4%, 8%, 5%, 2% add them together and divide by number of WMU's it will average 5.78%. This would explain why as I stated earlier that in a couple of SMU's that this number has grown to be above 10% and that we are in negotiations involving SRD involving a large number of mule deer tags. The funny thing about it is that I have never heard anyone complain about the particular WMU's involved in that SMU.
|
So you would be supportive of allocations being based on WMUs rather than SMUs? I agree, most hunters have never heard of SMUs, but the reality is that allocations being based on the SMU can have a significant impact on individual WMUs.
Maybe resident hunters who read this can take this as a learning moment.