Guide in Idaho, Units 32/ 32a proposal?

[mile high]

True Blue, you are correct that Chris could add an additional 25 resident hunters if they chose to go with him and that would decrease the odds of you drawing a resident tag. My question is where are these residents right now? Are they hunting there on their own or with friends, using their own dogs, or just plain do not exist? Are they not hunting there because there does not exist a legal means for them to hunt there or are they putting in already and hiring someone under the table just so they can be allowed to hunt this area? I was generalizing when I was giving statistics about outfitted public being 3% of the general public. I believe it was closer to 3.5 % but was not trying to get technical, just trying to make a point about the majority of outfitted clients. I do not know the exact number of non resident outfitted hunters vs. resident outfitted hunters. Again, in general numbers, the vast majority of outfitted clients are non residents. Many of these numbers are close to 20 years old but I beleive they are still close. If you have any information that says otherwise, I would love to hear it.

The fish and game allows up to 10% non resident tags. I do not hunt in these units and have not looked on the fish and game web site to see how many hunters apply for these bear tags. It would be easy to find.
As far as my statement about having a legal outfitter in an area vs. illegal outfitters, I have no scientific data. I am only stating what I have seen in the past. I have watched outfitters leave an area and seen illegal outfitters set up shop. I have also seen the reverse scenario.
I really believe that one legal outfitter will put less impact on your resource than having several illegal outfitters. This is not good news if you are an illegal outfitter.
It is nice to see common sense replies instead of volitile, highly passionate stabs at people. Trav

[hyde]

O.K. I did not want to write on this post again for I believed I had made my point. However, there are a lot of things that are being over looked, and I have to write once more. First, I believe that Chris runs a good operation, and I will not try to burn him. But here are some of my concerns.
As for everyone talking about the tags and the % of people that draw them, I have concerns. I believe that Idaho allows 200 out of state hound hunter permits per year. (please correct me if I am wrong). These out of state hunters may apply for the draw tags in units 32/32a. If they do not draw, then they cannot bring dogs to hunt these units.
Currently, these units do not have an Outfitter and guide license. It was proposed years ago around 94/95 for one, but denied with support from the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Assotiation.
Now, if we allow a Guide into these units, then those from out of state may apply, and if they do not get their out of state hound permit they can call upon the outfitter to take them hunting. So please do not say that this does not affect the local houndsmen of this area. It does! And I would not believe for one minute that a guide would refuse to accept money from someone from another state.
Next, if we want to talk of the 10% of people that can apply to these units from out of state, then lets talk about this. It will be advertised by this outfitter that he may take clients into this area. If 10% from out of state may apply for these tags, it really does not matter that the guide can only take a few clients does it? It put tags in out of staters hands, and only a few select of them to hunt, while the people surrounding this unit twittle their thumbs without a tag!
On a final note, let's talk about this outfitter whom we all respect. Chris already mentioned that he is 42 years old with great ethics. O.K. I agree. However, if this proposal passes years will go by. There will be a Guide license in these units. WHO IS THE NEXT GUIDE? Will he have the same ethics? I stand my ground by saying no to this.. No disrespect twords anyone.

[mixed bunch]

good comments and a great disscussion specially about tags and who is getting them. most guys i know that hunt this includding myself that has drawn a tag it is more about just running the dogs and true blue is right its jelousy more of who drew the tag not harvesting. for that area i havent seen anybody illegally outfitting but pretty sure they would not share that with others so i really dont know if that is going on.

i went to the fish and game website and looked at the odds of drawing a tag for this unit, i have never done that before but found going back to 2005 that residents and non residents that have applied during this time period is increasing every year along with the tags that are being given to non residents so needless to say it is getting harder to draw the tag.

in 2005 there were 75 tags 442 res applied 18 non res applied and 1 non res drew. if you compare it to 2011 there were 100 tags 728 res applied 31 non res applied and 7 non res drew.

i wonder how many more people will apply with an outfitter in the area that dont need a hound hunter permit?

[culverz]

I like reading both sides. You can see who is writing what. Outfitters on one side and your non outfitters on the other. My question is, If its not broke why fix it? Seems like it is fine the way it is, so why make a change and possibly have negative influence on the local guys.


Zach

[final step]

(Correct me if im wrong) but you dont need a out of state hound hunting permit to hunt on these tags. If i remember right the month of september you can run dogs and the month of october you cant so that means a person can spot and stalk with or without a guide for bear and lions.

[hyde]

final step, you just brought up a point that I have completely over looked. You are 100% correct.In october one cannot run hounds! We have focused on hound hunting and you are correct that one may hunt without the aid of dogs in october. That is a Valid point, and I commend you for bringing that subject forward. However, in our current situation, they still cannot be soliceted by a Guide, or Pay money to spot and stalk. This brings a new topic to the table. Will an outfitter in this unit provide hunting opportunities to bear hunters in these units in october?

[Dennis Fisher]

hyde, like you, I decided to back out of this just to see what the input of others was. And thank you for finally bringing forth the start of the true threat here. I tried to bring it forth before, but unfortunately, it seems I did go over some heads with that last one.

First off, I'll make two points about my last post. They speak for themselves.

(1) When a group of people that belong to a monopoly have absolutely nothing bad to say against and are defending the way they are "governed" to the max, surely this alone raises red flags with all.

(2) Second, I see it has being unfortunate that some people see the only way the capitalistic system will work with outfitting is by all being a Outfitter. They only have to look at how the many, many other things that are also Public Natural Resources are managed, limited and controlled very successfully to find several other solutions. For instance, ski areas and lodges, mines and recreation sites, grazing allotments and timber contracts and many more. Everyone of us has a opportunity to utilize this State's Public Resources in many ways. All are highly controlled with limitations and restriction to how they can be done by many Governing Agencies. All you have to do is find what you think you can do and set about going through the process to get it done. All except those things that the Outfitters control. Given the exact same limitations and restrictions has now, I have absolutely no doubt that there are Guides and others that look at how any of the many Outfitting Business's are now run and knows (thinks) they can do a better job and make a profit at doing it. But unfortunately, they'll never get the chance with a Socialistic system in place that allows only one to control all without competition.

Now to the true threat here. The other Sporting Groups will fight this to the max for one specific reason. That is to protect all of our TRADITIONAL rights to hunt in this State. It is a WAR that all Sporting Groups have been fighting together for a long, long time. Unfortunately, "big money" is slowly changing our State into becoming what States like Texas and others now are. Surely all know of property owners tags and how those can now be "Guided" for profit. Surely all have heard of "Trespass Permits" that allow you to go onto private land to hunt. Surely all know how a group I will refer to has the "Hunting Sierra Club" is protesting all new activities on Public Ground and won't release them until that ground is locked up in the name of "Elk Habitat", where only the ones with big bucks and the time can penetrate. When the A & B Elk Tags were being established, there was a heck of a battle over those. There were those that thought the big bull tags ought to be a type of lottery type system. I can go on and on about the continual attacks against Sport Hunting in this State. But again, surely all already know many of them has well as I.

I see absolutely no reason to attack this Outfitter, even though I have a "personal experience" with him. The reason is simple, his fight is with the perception of this and that alone is where we should stay. I've already stated this, YOU OPEN THE DOOR AND YOU ALLOW ALL THAT IS BEHIND IT IN. Unfortunately, because of the perception that ALL Sporting Groups will have, he is also promoting the Sport of Hunting with Hounds to be brought down with his proposal.

I have already brought forth a scenario that could happen during the Pursuit Season that should of scared the heck out of most of you that hunt there. Now hyde has brought forth a scenario that will allow Guiding in a area that doesn't have it during Elk and Deer Season. The other Sporting Groups such has the Archer's, the Muzzleloader's, and the Orange Army (the rifle hunter's) will have the same perceptions of what could happen. This is why they'll fight this to the end to save and protect the Traditional way of hunting in Idaho.

They will fight this undoubtedly from any and all fronts. I see they have three ways of defeating this, and undoubtedly they will use all of them.

(1) They will attack the record and anything else they have against this Outfitter. I see this has being his problem. One that will definitely cause him problems in the long run. Just has it was the downfall of the other that tried this.

(2) They will defend the Non-Outfitter Status of these areas in any manor possible.

(3) Since the use of dogs are the tool of this Outfitters proposal, they will undoubtedly go after the use of them to ensure it's defeat. I should need not have to mention how the Archers are already in "competition" with the fall season now and how powerful and well organized that group is. This is where and when I can only hope those that are now in control of the IHA have quite polishing their trophies and have joined with those groups has I suggested earlier. Working with them to stop this is the only way of protecting our Sport in this, from within. Has long has this Outfitter continues with this ludicrous proposal anyways.

[idahohunter]

It sounds like it is going to be at most two more dead bears and two more dead lions and maybe 3% worse draw odds.

In comparison, California will likely lose all hound hunting besides coons and foxes.

I wouldn't get my panties in a wad either way on this issue.