[Bux n Dux]

On the LE hunt side, the vast majority of hunters in Utah will put in for one unit and one weapon only until the either draw the tag or stop hunting.

Could they draw a tag in another unit quicker, quite possibly. They could also change weapon choice, but they want that one unit and one weapon.

You can see that here on the forum when we get a new resident member asking about a unit that they have never step foot into.

My brother in law was almost like what I described. He only wanted to hunt with a rifle but he was willing to learn new places, as long as he could hunt deer with a rifle

While I respect that choice by those hunters, it certainly cost them several opportunities at other types of great hunts during their life time because of that decision. If you become proficient at all 3 weapon types and don’t mind exploring the state (or states) and learning new areas and trying new things, the possibilities are dam near endless. Even in today’s disaster of trying to get multiple tags in your pocket every year.

 

[backcountry]

Utah’s system is the best, most fair system out of all the systems.

I might be able to agree with that if we didn't have the fiasco of the lifetime license still at play. That unequivocally alters the fairness of the system.

Not to mention any point system favors those who bought in earlier. Full random draw favors no one. In the realm of fairness that's difficult to beat. Yet it still has downstream consequences.

Reality is no system is ultimately fair in both application process & outcomes. You end up sacrificing one for the other.

It's not a perfect analogy but it's why I consider these systems ponzi schemes. Those who put in later always fair worse than those who bought in sooner. And we have enough data now that it's very likely we are robbing future generations of opportunity to maintain satisfaction for current hunters, at least when it comes to big game like deer.

So it's difficult for me to consider this situation the fairest and best. And I can't change it so there's not much to do other than make the most of it. But I don't think future conservation/wildlife texts are going to paint a pretty picture about this era.

 

[backcountry]

For context, respectable projections estimate 2.2 million more residents by 2060. That's a 66% increase in 37 years.

Factor in increased sprawl, decreased winter habitat, and other factors and it's hard to imagine a deer herd population that's going to increase to meet the needs associated with continued growth in interest in our shared hobby. Last year the actual herd size was estimated to be roughly 75% of the target goal, so we continue to operate at a deficit for current plans. Those plans aren't reflective of the future demand in a few decades, if Utah's trend in hunter recruitment & retention hold stable (big IF).

That's not an ideal picture for future generations.

 

[Critter]

I might be able to agree with that if we didn't have the fiasco of the lifetime license still at play. That unequivocally alters the fairness of the system.

If you look at the data for the LL you will see that it has very little effect on the general deer draws.

The last time that I looked, there were less than 3500 active LL out there, and a number of them are also in the DH program that throws the LL out the window for those 3 years.

You can also look at the commitment to wildlife that those of us who purchased them made to wildlife at the time that we purchased them.


Sent from my SM-A426U using Tapatalk

 

[backcountry]

If you look at the data for the LL you will see that it has very little effect on the general deer draws.

The last time that I looked, there were less than 3500 active LL out there, and a number of them are also in the DH program that throws the LL out the window for those 3 years.

You can also look at the commitment to wildlife that those of us who purchased them made to wildlife at the time that we purchased them.


Sent from my SM-A426U using Tapatalk

It's not about the benefit you provide when it comes to the issue of fairness. Every lifetime license holder is wise to reap the benefits.

When it comes to "fairness" any system that offered such a phenomenal opportunity to only a limited group of people is unequivocally unfair. By creating a program and then eliminating those benefits for others the state created a fundamentally unfair system.

Even if that number drops in half, 1750 guaranteed tags when there are only 75k available (last year I believe) is anything but miniscule. That's not a criticism of individuals with those licenses, it's a criticism of the state's complete lack of foresight in the past.

Put another way, what's "fair" about 3500 people getting licenses every year if they want them versus the experience of the rest of Utah's deer hunt applicants? The answer to that is clear as day.

 

[Critter]

The program was offered to every resident of the state of Utah until it was reended.

There wasn't any one group that it was offered to.

Eliminating the benefit is nothing different from eliminating any other benefit that the state offers for a period of time and then putting a hault to it. They do it all the time

 

[backcountry]

The program was offered to every resident of the state of Utah until it was reended.

There wasn't any one group that it was offered to.

Eliminating the benefit is nothing different from eliminating any other benefit that the state offers for a period of time and then putting a hault to it. They do it all the time

You are arguing for something that has no bearing on my criticism. For some there was an opportunity, those from 1984 to 1994. For 28 full years since then others didn't have that opportunity. That's inherently inequitable. Sorry, there is no argument against that fact.

Once the last lifetime holder dies that criticism will become moot. For perspective, that should happen after I die. But if any parent was wise enough to buy their child one the final year it was offered this program will have an impact for decades to come.

 

[Critter]

Sounds like sour grapes that if you were born before they discontinued them that your parents didn't have the foresight to purchase one for their kids.

But in reality since this discussion was about LE tags a LL has nothing to do with it.

 

[MrShane]

You are arguing for something that has no bearing on my criticism. For some there was an opportunity, those from 1984 to 1994. For 28 full years since then others didn't have that opportunity. That's inherently inequitable. Sorry, there is no argument against that fact.

Once the last lifetime holder dies that criticism will become moot. For perspective, that should happen after I die. But if any parent was wise enough to buy their child one the final year it was offered this program will have an impact for decades to come.

I am not one of the lucky ones to hold an LL.
My Dad and Mom, and both my Grandpa and Grandma hunted Deer with us before I was old enough to hunt.
To this day I do not understand why they did not impress on me the urgency to buy one.
Now that said, I don’t mind and I am not mad at those that hold an LL.
They were just smarter than me, and timing is everything.
It seems you are hung up a little on a ‘lifes not fair’ type issue.
I agree, it is not.
You seem like a very smart guy.
If I were you I would take advantage of everything you can right now and live in this moment.
The way the world is going it could all be gone in the push of a button.
It is what makes ‘life’ so dang exciting!

 

[2full]

I might be able to agree with that if we didn't have the fiasco of the lifetime license still at play. That unequivocally alters the fairness of the system.

Not to mention any point system favors those who bought in earlier. Full random draw favors no one. In the realm of fairness that's difficult to beat. Yet it still has downstream consequences.

Especially the comment on the lifetime licenses.

 

[Vanilla]

Unfair? Not buying that. It’s not unfair DallanC got to experience two deer tags per season and I don’t because the time we each were born. (He’s talked about that numerous times, that’s why I use his name.) Opportunities change over time in all aspects of life. It’s not unfair, it’s called life. Is it fair you could get a mortgage 18 months ago for just over 3% and today it’s over 6%? Is that unfair to those that weren’t looking for a mortgage then but are now? Unfair…hmmmm, nope. Was it unfair my older brother couldn’t big game hunt until he was 16, I got to do it at 14, and kids today can at 12?

Fair is such a hard word and I don’t think anyone really is concerned with “fairness.” When you say full random draw favors nobody, so it’s fair, explain how fair it would be to take points away from people.

The world isn’t “fair” and it never will be. Things change and that is just how it is. I bought my own LL when I was 13 years old. Was it “fair” I’d had a paper route at that time for almost 5 years and had my own money to be able to do this kind of thing and my buddies didn’t? Is it fair my mom doesn’t have to do hunter education if she wants to hunt but my wife and daughters would?

Unfair. Yeah, not buying that.

Lastly, the LL issue has absolutely nothing to do with point creep on LE hunts. It’s completely irrelevant. The two are not connected in any way.

 

[backcountry]

I am not one of the lucky ones to hold an LL.
My Dad and Mom, and both my Grandpa and Grandma hunted Deer with us before I was old enough to hunt.
To this day I do not understand why they did not impress on me the urgency to buy one.
Now that said, I don’t mind and I am not mad at those that hold an LL.
They were just smarter than me, and timing is everything.
It seems you are hung up a little on a ‘lifes not fair’ type issue.
I agree, it is not.
You seem like a very smart guy.
If I were you I would take advantage of everything you can right now and live in this moment.
The way the world is going it could all be gone in the push of a button.
It is what makes ‘life’ so dang exciting!

Nope. I'm actually not even arguing it "should" be something else. I've very much accepted the current scenario. In fact, I often choose not to officially voice or vote for things that would better advantage my ideals in hunting because I'm willing to accept the inequity when it disadvantages me.

And, when we make judgements about fairness it appropriate and accurate to point out the facts that make that untrue. The current system is not fair so long as lifetime license holders get a tag every year, if they so choose.

And I've stated already, I don't begrudge any LL holder for making that investment or obtaining that tag every year as promised. It's a wise choice for the individual in multiple ways.

And it was a poor decision to implement the program as the state did given the realities of hunting big game in the West. There was always going to be a probability the system was unsustainable and therefore create inequity. And, it did exactly that. That became so obvious to the state they ended it in an abrupt 10 years.

Life definitely isn't fair. I could list off personal examples just like every person on this forum. And I will be honest and accurate to the best of my ability when it comes to addressing that fact. I can do that as well as not only accept that when it comes to realities out of my direct control, like the Utah big game system, but also thoroughly enjoy myself in the process. Those realities aren't mutually exclusive nor have I said they are.

If you go back and read my actual criticism earlier you'll notice I've been consistent in communicating those themes.

 

[backcountry]

Unfair? Not buying that. It’s not unfair DallanC got to experience two deer tags per season and I don’t because the time we each were born. (He’s talked about that numerous times, that’s why I use his name.) Opportunities change over time in all aspects of life. It’s not unfair, it’s called life. Is it fair you could get a mortgage 18 months ago for just over 3% and today it’s over 6%? Is that unfair to those that weren’t looking for a mortgage then but are now? Unfair…hmmmm, nope. Was it unfair my older brother couldn’t big game hunt until he was 16, I got to do it at 14, and kids today can at 12?

Fair is such a hard word and I don’t think anyone really is concerned with “fairness.” When you say full random draw favors nobody, so it’s fair, explain how fair it would be to take points away from people.

The world isn’t “fair” and it never will be. Things change and that is just how it is. I bought my own LL when I was 13 years old. Was it “fair” I’d had a paper route at that time for almost 5 years and had my own money to be able to do this kind of thing and my buddies didn’t? Is it fair my mom doesn’t have to do hunter education if she wants to hunt but my wife and daughters would?

Unfair. Yeah, not buying that.

Lastly, the LL issue has absolutely nothing to do with point creep on LE hunts. It’s completely irrelevant. The two are not connected in any way.

Nothing in your post effectively criticizes any points I actually initially said , and have now clarified multiple times. In fact, you'll notice I already pointed out full random draw has "downstream effects". I've also stated similar to you, that fairness is contextual and often involves sacrificing one quality, like equity in draws, for another, like equity in outcomes, like actually being able to hunt a certain number of times in ones lifetime.

It sounds like your criticism is actually against the exact same thing I'm criticizing, ie the system is "fair" as stated by Shane. On that we agree. We just got there via different paths.

*And guaranteed LL tags will always impact current and future user successful tag odds as long as they exist in the user pool. It therefore disadvantages current and future hunters without them until it is no longer a variable. May that last person live long and enjoy hunting as long as they desire because the error was on the part of the state, not that individual or their wise family members who got it for them.

 

[middlefork]

I think satisfaction runs a whole gamut of emotions which vary by individual. And to base a hunt type decision on other peoples satisfaction level is a bit mis guided. I think B&D's original definition works. I'm not quite sure why someone would need something else.

I'll agree it is hard to be satisfied if you never hunt. But I tend to agree that if you are not hunting it is because of your personal decisions.

 

[Bux n Dux]

Unfair? Not buying that. It’s not unfair DallanC got to experience two deer tags per season and I don’t because the time we each were born. (He’s talked about that numerous times, that’s why I use his name.) Opportunities change over time in all aspects of life. It’s not unfair, it’s called life. Is it fair you could get a mortgage 18 months ago for just over 3% and today it’s over 6%? Is that unfair to those that weren’t looking for a mortgage then but are now? Unfair…hmmmm, nope. Was it unfair my older brother couldn’t big game hunt until he was 16, I got to do it at 14, and kids today can at 12?

Fair is such a hard word and I don’t think anyone really is concerned with “fairness.” When you say full random draw favors nobody, so it’s fair, explain how fair it would be to take points away from people.

The world isn’t “fair” and it never will be. Things change and that is just how it is. I bought my own LL when I was 13 years old. Was it “fair” I’d had a paper route at that time for almost 5 years and had my own money to be able to do this kind of thing and my buddies didn’t? Is it fair my mom doesn’t have to do hunter education if she wants to hunt but my wife and daughters would?

Unfair. Yeah, not buying that.

Lastly, the LL issue has absolutely nothing to do with point creep on LE hunts. It’s completely irrelevant. The two are not connected in any way.

It’s unfair, because he watched MeatBeater on Netflix 4 years ago and decided he wanted to be a real man and become a hunter. But after using his google machine that he so heavily relies on to be somewhat relevant in any conversation he wants to insert himself in, he soon became to understand that while he pizzed away those years doing whatever it is he did for fun, mostly hiking and driving around a Subaru in Zion’s NP, there were many people who were investing their time in buying points every year and taking advantage of all opportunities available to ANYONE who wanted to pursue them. Not it’s not “fair” because he probably won’t draw a OIL bighorn sheep tag. He probably won’t draw a SJ LE elk tag and he probably won’t draw any other tags that it takes 10+ points to draw as of right now. While during the same time of his attempts to get lucky and pull a tag, many others will have consistent draw success on great tags because they have been investing and waiting their turn in line. That’s why it’s not “fair”.

 

[CPAjeff]

Great work Airborne, interesting results for sure!

A wise man once said, "even in the golden age of time, someone, undoubtably complained, that everything looked too yellow." I have yet to give any hunt a satisfaction rate of less than 5. Hunting is freaking great, even if a tag isn't punched, it's much better to be out in the hills than at work.

One of the smallest bucks I've killed was shot on a CWMU tag. To this day, it's still one of my favorite hunts.

 

[Vanilla]

I only saw small bucks on my general tag this year, I did not pull the trigger. I gave a 5 star rating.

Hunts are what you make them.

 

[MrShane]

Nothing in your post effectively criticizes any points I actually initially said , and have now clarified multiple times. In fact, you'll notice I already pointed out full random draw has "downstream effects". I've also stated similar to you, that fairness is contextual and often involves sacrificing one quality, like equity in draws, for another, like equity in outcomes, like actually being able to hunt a certain number of times in ones lifetime.

It sounds like your criticism is actually against the exact same thing I'm criticizing, ie the system is "fair" as stated by Shane. On that we agree. We just got there via different paths.

*And guaranteed LL tags will always impact current and future user successful tag odds as long as they exist in the user pool. It therefore disadvantages current and future hunters without them until it is no longer a variable. May that last person live long and enjoy hunting as long as they desire because the error was on the part of the state, not that individual or their wise family members who got it for them.

Just to be clear, and you can go back to post #16 to confirm, I said ‘most’ fair of the systems.
No system is perfect.
If it was, I would have a Buck/Bull/Pronghorn tag every year!

 

[backcountry]

That clarification is both fair and fairer than several others directed at me tonight

And I think the heart of the disagreement remains. Any system with a inherent advantage like the LL provided is less fair than the same infrastructure without it. The state could have implemented that system but chose not to. That was a significant failure on their part to start with and their failure to fully remedy it has created a very specific consequence that won't be remedied for decades. They chose the easy option and kicked the can down the road.

And thank you for ultimately not making it as personal as Critter and another user did. That's appreciated. Having a moderator choose to do so reflects extremely poorly on this forum and sets an example to others to pile on in a similar manner. So thank you for the tone and approach you took in your follow up.

Ultimately the administrators of this site have chosen to allow trolling to not only be acceptable but actively supported by at least one of them (likes inherently count as support). I applaud those who show the integrity and restraint of not following the lead of such behavior.

The irony of all of this is I'm not even advocating for my own ability to hunt more. I've been extremely happy with my time in the field nor was Utah even on my radar in the relevant years. My primary complaint regarding relative "fairness" is we are selling future hunters short. But you know, it's just "sour grapes", etc.

So it goes. I don't have direct control over much. But criticism about the state's choices is fair game when evaluating "satisfaction". And ultimately I'm currently dealing with noticeably more pressing issues of "fairness". I hope you have a good evening Shane.

 

[taxidermist]

Nothing "UNFAIR" about the lifetime tags. They were offered years ago and some took advantage of it. I had that chance to get one and didn't. Still kicking myself on that one.

It's like saying a 63 split window sitting in my garage that was purchased for 5K new, is now worth $160K that's all original, 34K original miles. I look at the lifetime tags as an investment made for the future.