Boycott Barnes bullets!

27 July 2004, 16:58

Mike Smith

I can see some merit to both sides of this argument. Both are right and both are wrong. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. It appears it depends on whose ox is getting gored.

27 July 2004, 17:08

jaycocreek

You guys care-I don't.If I was a Barnes user I would continue but I'm not.Would I still watch a Baldwin Movie--Yep.Both are good and my opinion does not matter but they do and choose the wrong politics and that is all it is politics...

Barnes bullets are one of the best and S&W went thru the same thing years ago and look who's buying the new 500 S&W?

Life goes on............Jayco.

27 July 2004, 17:24

Outdoor Writer

Quote:

So, what you are telling me is that non-residents applying for 10% of the permits have the same odds of being drawn as residents applying for 90% of the permits??? Got to call BS on that one!

Call it what you wish, but it's getting more and more obvious that you haven't a clue as to how the computer drawing works in AZ. So pay attention, and I'll type slower so you can perhaps understand what even my 8-yr.old granddaughter can.

First, the NUMBER of available NR permits do not determine the odds of getting drawn. It merely determines the NUMBER of permits NRs can draw in any given unit. Out of the box, a NR has as much chance as a resident as being the very first one selected.

The odds of getting drawn are determined by the number of applicants that chose a particular unit as their First Choice. Both residents and NRs are included in the SAME draw! In other words, if there are 100 permits and 1000 first choice applicants, that's a one in 10 chance or 10%. Now with the 10% NR cap, that means only 10 permits of the 100 will go to NRs.

Got all this so far? 100 permits, 1,000 applicants means 10% drawing odds or 1 in 10.

Now when the computer starts selecting numbers, it doesn't know whether someone is a NR or a resident because there is no name or state in the database -- only assigned numbers for each person.

Now follow along close here. I'll try to go through real slow so as not to overwhelm your reading comprehension level, which appears to be a bit lower than your vocabulary level of an RMK wannabe.

The computer picks 10 numbers. No NRs are included. That means there are still 10 NR permits in the mix.

The computer picks 10 more numbers; three are NRs chosen. That means there are now 7 NR permits left. The computer picks another 50 numbers before it hits another 3 NRs. That means of the first 70 picks, six NRs got permits of the 10 available under the cap. Now the computer picks the last 30 names and five are NRs. Only four of them will get permits in that unit. BUT..if the 5th one listed a second choice unit, and the cap wasn't hit in that second choice unit, he would get a permit in that second choice unit.

Sooo...NOTHING in the computer selection process favors residents over NRS as far as the drawing ODDS are concerned. The ONLY limit for NRs is the TOTAL NUMBER of permits allotted to them in any one unit.

Quote:

they should have that info available and broken down into figures for residents and non-residents!

And I have no need to get the odds from the game department; I have them at my fingertips for every year for the past 10 or so to the present. There are no such odds separating NRs from residents because as outlined above, NRs and residents have the same odds. Now, is there a particular hunt you would like the drawing odds for?

Quote:

do you really think we are stupid enough to believe that

I refuse to vouch for your level of stupideness. Others can deternmine that on their own. Hopefully, they'll go easy on you and consider where you're from.

-TONY

27 July 2004, 17:27

M16

Quote:

That didn't answer the question as to anyone can hunt these elk without a license. -TONY

If you are a resident you can hunt free ranging elk with your hunting license. If you are a non-resident you would need to either purchase a general hunting license or a five day hunting license. Elk are considered an exotic animal.

Non-resident 5-Day Special Hunting (Type 157): $45
Legal for any period of 5 consecutive days (valid hunting dates will be printed on the license when issued). Valid to hunt: Exotic animals, all legal game birds (except turkeys), all nongame animals, squirrel and javelina (not valid for other game animals or alligators).

Exotic animal refers to grass-eating or plant-eating, single-hoofed or cloven-hoofed mammals that are not indigenous or native to Texas and are known as ungulates, including animals from the deer and antelope families that landowners have introduced into this state. Includes, but is not limited to feral hog, Aoudad sheep, Axis deer, Elk, Sika deer, Fallow deer, Blackbuck antelope, Nilgai antelope, and Russian boar. Exotic fowl refers to any avian species that is not indigenous to this state, including ratites.
There are no state bag or possession limits or closed seasons on exotic animals or fowl on private property. It is against the law to:
Hunt an exotic without a valid hunting license.
Hunt an exotic on a public road or right-of-way.
Hunt an exotic without the landowner's permission.
Possess an exotic or the carcass of an exotic without the owner's consent.

This should answer your question.

27 July 2004, 17:34

Outdoor Writer

Quote:

including animals from the deer and antelope families that landowners have introduced into this state. Includes, but is not limited to feral hog, Aoudad sheep, Axis deer, Elk, Sika deer, Fallow deer, Blackbuck antelope, Nilgai antelope, and Russian boar. Exotic fowl refers to any avian species that is not indigenous to this state, including ratites.

Hmmmm, I thought you said these were free-ranging, wild elk? Sounds more like they are like every other exotic target animal in TX -- simply another "pay for play" species for some landowner to make a buck on. -TONY

27 July 2004, 19:00

Wstrnhuntr

Quote:

You can certainly 'vote with your pocketbook', but the real problem is the way decisions are made within the legislature and game departments.
Certain business interests (mining, ranching, agriculture, tourism) have a lot of influence over how the public can access public lands.
While non-residents paid a huge proportion of the game depts. budgets (I think most game depts. have to pay for themselves, with no support from the general fund), they received a very small slice of the pie.
Just as Congress can rewrite laws held to be unconstitutional by the federal courts, so too can the state legislatures rewrite their allocation formulas.

CPS

Hey cps, welcome to the forum. I see a lot of truth in what you say there. And the state(s) rewriting formulas is probably going to end up being the long term soulution to all of this by and large. One aspect of that that really sucks is, as I mentioned earlier, it is already mighty difficult for F&G to get herds back into decent condition and to find a way to maintain them. This mess is yet another obstacle for them to overcome, a huge one, and it is going to take away rescources from the existing problems and focus from the present course.

One step forward and two steps back as it were..

27 July 2004, 20:07

Bwana-be

Quote:

I'll wager that if something like USO Guides wants comes about, there won't be any decent hunting out in the western states for anybody, because if the locals get pushed out for the non-residents, the state will just close it all, to everyone. They'll quit managing the wildlife because the people they "work for", i.e. the people of the state, since they see no gain, will just shut them down through the legislature. Why pay to manage game we don't have access to?

This is an important point.
We can all cry about how we share the playground, but if the guy that brought the ball goes home, ain't nobody playing.

I really don't know how much of my money goes to federal land management, and how much of that goes to any particular state. I'll say of the shitpile my money does pay for, it's nice to think some of it goes to preserving gameland. I'm from TN, and there's more deer their than I'll ever need, thanks to the excellent people there that manage the herds. KY is looking to have huntable elk within my lifetime; maybe that'll extend south to TN and beyond. And it won't be funded by anyone but the locals. If they even suspect it'll all go to a bunch of rich out-of-towners you can bet it won't happen at all.

The game belongs to the state. Go look at it all you want, just don't take it home with you.

27 July 2004, 21:48

lawndart

Hey Arts, Bwana-be,
Send me PM's. Let's do a little Chukar or Duck hunting this December. I live where Idaho, Nevada, and Oregon meet. I promise no Texans (that includes my mother, father, and two of my sisters).
USO wanted the Idaho Elk herd, but the wolves beat 'em to it.
There is one Barnes product that we won't be boycotting up here in tater land. They make a pointy nosed solid. If a wolf gets hit just a bit back of the diaphragm with one of those it's a through and through hole. Mr. Lobo goes about three or four miles before he stiffens up and takes a nap. I don't abide by such behavior, being a law abiding citizen and all, but you do hear rumors....
JCN
PS Outdoor Writer, you can come up also, but we have to blind fold you on our way to the hunting spots on account of your profession and all..oh yeah, leave the GPS at home.
I do like to hunt Texas every few years. Hire a houndsman, chase some wild hogs, and when the hold dog grabs the ear I jump on porky and do my thang with a long knife. It is better than sex...

28 July 2004, 04:34

GonHuntin

Quote:

First, the NUMBER of available NR permits do not determine the odds of getting drawn.

BS of the highest order! You weren't a math major, were you.........

The ODDS of getting drawn is a mathematical function of number of applicants divided by number of permits available PERIOD! In what order the permits are issued has NO bearing on the initial odds of being drawn!

Quote:

Out of the box, a NR has as much chance as a resident as being the very first one selected.

That is nice......BUT it has NOTHING to do with the ODDS of being drawn!

If there are 100 total permits available in a unit and 1000 non-resident applicants.....then each non-resident applicant has a 1% (or less) chance of being drawn for a permit in that unit........doesn't make any difference whether the non-residents are drawn first, last of somewhere in the middle......the ODDS are still 1% (or less)that the non-resident will draw a permit for that unit. ("or less" depends on whether there are 10% guaranteed NR tags or just a 10% cap......big difference!)

Quote:

The odds of getting drawn are determined by the number of applicants that chose a particular unit as their First Choice. Both residents and NRs are included in the SAME draw! In other words, if there are 100 permits and 1000 first choice applicants, that's a one in 10 chance or 10%. Now with the 10% NR cap, that means only 10 permits of the 100 will go to NRs.

In your example, the non-resident does not have the same odds of being drawn......BECAUSE...... they are limited to only 10 permits! Jeez......don't you get it? Non-residents are NOT drawing for 100 permits......they are drawing for 10!

Quote:

Got all this so far? 100 permits, 1,000 applicants means 10% drawing odds or 1 in 10.

Nope.....What I "GOT" is that you don't understand Odds! Think about it......since there is a 10% cap on NRs.......then NRs are drawing for 10 permits.....NOT 100.......now, if we knew what percentage of the applicants were residents, we could determine the odds for each group........

Quote:

The computer picks 10 numbers. No NRs are included. That means there are still 10 NR permits in the mix.

The computer picks 10 more numbers; three are NRs chosen. That means there are now 7 NR permits left. The computer picks another 50 numbers before it hits another 3 NRs. That means of the first 70 picks, six NRs got permits of the 10 available under the cap. Now the computer picks the last 30 names and five are NRs. Only four of them will get permits in that unit.

There are two big things you can't seem to grasp:

1. Non-residents aren't drawing for the whole pie, only 10% of the pie.......that means NRs have absolutely NO CHANCE of drawing 90 of those permits!

2. in the drawing process itself, a resident's odds of drawing go UP as the 10% cap is approached and a non-residents odds go down (rapidly) as the cap is approached.......

How, you ask? Easy.......when the 10% cap is reached...... ALL the non-residents are eliminated from any chance of drawing that permit.....by eliminating a large portion of applicants from the pool!

You really need to stick to journalism.........math is not your strong point

The fact is, you can't put the genie back in the bottle......your state screwed the pooch.....and now it's going to pay! You and I can argue about it from now on, but the courts have spoken......the fat lady sang.....it's a done deal. If, your state tries to side step the ruling, someone else with deep pockets will come along and spank them again........so get use to it.....things have changed!

28 July 2004, 05:41

rickt300

Yeah Tony's math equals his logic of creating bias against Texans to prove Az's old system was fair. He coulda have been one of Clintons spinmasters. Wait till they get to Wyoming where all locals get to buy over the counter General elk and deer tags and there are none for nonresidents. Hope RMK has a stroke.

28 July 2004, 05:45

Outdoor Writer

Quote:

The ODDS of getting drawn is a mathematical function of number of applicants divided by number of permits available PERIOD!

Bingo!!

For the first draw, it's calculated by the TOTAL first & second choice applicants divided by the TOTAL permits available. That's why the number of NR permits under the cap has nothing to do with the DRAWING ODDS, which seems to escape you. They they are identical for everyone because there is only ONE drawing, not separate ones for NRs and residents.

Thus, look at it like a raffle, which it is in effect. I'll keep the numbers low so you don't need a calculator.

There are ten names in a hat with one prize available. What are the DRAWING odds for EACH name?

There are 100 names in a hat with 10 prizes available. What are the DRAWING odds for EACH name?

-TONY

28 July 2004, 07:27

GonHuntin

Quote:

There are ten names in a hat with one prize available. What are the DRAWING odds for EACH name?

There are 100 names in a hat with 10 prizes available. What are the DRAWING odds for EACH name?

I'm not a mathematical genius....but I'll give it a go!

1. Initially, the odds are 1 in 10 or 10%.......

2. Initially, the odds are 1 in 10 or 10%......

However, your models aren't accurate because they don't consider the 10% cap.....if we change your model to mirror the AZ drawing equation it goes something like this:

There are 10 prizes and 100 names in the hat.......but, "X" number of the names in the hat (let's say X=40) are only eligible to be drawn UNTIL 1 of those 40 names is pulled from the hat......so, if the first name pulled is one of those 40 names.......then 39 of the remaining names are discarded.....this leaves 60 names eligible to win the remaining 9 prizes.....if you are one of those remaining 60, your odds of being drawn have gone from 10% to 15%......while the odds of group X are now 0%

If the 3rd name drawn is one of the 40......again, 39 of the remaining 97 names are discarded......if you are one of the 58 remaining names left in the hat, your odds of being drawn have gone from 8.1% to 12%......while the odds of group X are now 0%

If the 5th name drawn is one of the 40, again, 39 of the remaining 95 names are discarded......if you are one of the 56 remaining names left in the hat, your odds of being drawn have gone from 6.2% to 9%......while the odds of group X are now 0%

Now, if X increases from 40 to 50 or 60, then the odds of drawing substantially increase for those not in the X group.

Have you got it yet???

I'm not addressing second choices......but, rest assured, as long as the 10% cap remains in the equation.....a non-resident will never have the same odds of drawing as a resident!

28 July 2004, 10:19

Outdoor Writer

Quote:

I'm not a mathematical genius....

No argument from me.

Quote:

However, your models aren't accurate because they don't consider the 10% cap.....if we change your model to mirror the AZ drawing equation it goes something like this:

The models in regards to the DRAWING ODDS, i.e. for someone's name to be picked out of many, do not need to consider anything but the stated figures.

And no names in the draw are discarded because second choice units come into play even after all first choices are filled in any given unit. Thus, if a NR number is drawn once the cap is hit in a unit he had listed as 1st choice, he then might get his 2nd choice.

Here's your major problem with "calculations."

First off, the computer assigns a random number from 1 to 1,000,000 to each application and/or bonus point for an applicant. Then it starts spitting out numbers in random order.

The computer drawing doesn't take place by hunt unit but by SPECIES. In other words, each number picked might have a different unit listed as their first choice, 2nd. etc. As the computer selects a number, the choices are checked and filled accordingly.

First pick out of the box -- Res. 1st choice Unit 1.

Second Pick - Res. Unit 27 as 1st choice.

Third Pick - NR Unit 7

Fourth Pick - NR Unit 9

Fifth pick - Res. Unit 4B

Sixth Pick - NR Unit 6A

Seventh Pick - Res. Unit 10 - group of 4 applicants,i.e. 4 permits

etc. etc.

The initial draw with only 1st and 2nd choice considered continues until A. Every permit is gone B. Until the computer has gone through all the names and there are still permits availble.

If B occurs, a SECOND drawing takes place for all those NOT chosen during the first go round. In other words, the deck is reshuffled and the drawing begins anew! BUT this 2nd drawing only involves an applicants 3rd, 4th and 5th choices on the application.

And of course, none of this takes in bonus points, which awards any applicant more numbers in the draw and raises the DRAWING ODDs for those with the MOST numbers in the computer database.

For example, you might have 7 points from past failures to draw a permit. Thus, this year, you will receive 8 numbers. I have only 1 point, so I get 2 numbers. Obviously, you having 8 more chances than me, have the best DRAWING ODDS, even though you're a NR.

Using our basis of 100 available permits, care to figure what the odds are for your number to come up over mine when you have 8 numbers and I have only 2?

Hmmm, maybe we need to do away with bonus points for any NRs, eh?

Oh, and then there's the bonus point pool of 10% of the permits, which go to those with the most bonus points for most species. NR and resident alike. -TONY

28 July 2004, 11:15

GonHuntin

Quote:

The models in regards to the DRAWING ODDS, i.e. for someone's name to be picked out of many, do not need to consider anything but the stated figures.

Tony

Admit it, you rode the short bus to school.....didn't you?

It's quite obvious that, even if you ever did "get it" you wouldn't admit it........so, discussing this with you is a hopeless waste of time.......

The good news for non-residents is......it doesn't matter because you already lost!

28 July 2004, 11:19

Outdoor Writer

Figured it got too complicated for your comprehension.

-TONY

28 July 2004, 11:27

RSY

This is pathetic.

Somebody e-mail me when all this fratricidal bullshit is over, especially the Texas-bashing.

RSY

28 July 2004, 11:51

Rogue6

Texas is Awesome. I love Texas. Viva La Texacans.

28 July 2004, 11:53

GonHuntin

Quote:

Figured it got too complicated for your comprehension.

Nope, I didn't major in journalism!

I've always suspected that outdoor writers weren't the sharpest tools in the shed.......now I'm sure of it!

Tell me.......who do you write for and under what name......I want to be sure I'm not wasting good money on those rags!

28 July 2004, 12:01

M16

Quote:

that's the stupidest thing i ever heard. i thought most texans were smart, but you're as dumb as a shoebox of assholes.

TasunkaWitko: Your statement may be true but that still makes me smarter than Tony!

28 July 2004, 13:19

Arts

Before you boys bash 'ol Writer too much about math, might be wise of you to study up on a few courses in advanced statistics. Hate to see you swallow your feet. Math and statistics aren't one and the same, though granted, math is a basis of statistics. You boys might find there is a thing or two to be learned regarding statistics.

28 July 2004, 15:56

M16

Well that's all fine and good so since it is so statistically fair how about we just do away with that non-resident cap?

29 July 2004, 04:31

AnotherAZWriter

At the end of the day the only thing the USO lawsuit is going to do is raise non-resident rates; perhaps even the hunting license itself which is a prereq to getting a bonus point.

Are $1000 elk tags in the best interests of hunting? I don't think so. When the day a middle class worker in Ohio can't dream of making an elk hunt is the day he stops buying powder and bullets to load that .338, videos on how to call, etc.

When he puts away that rifle for good, we all lose. Does Taulman care? Of course not. He is only interested in lining his own pockets.

29 July 2004, 05:23

Arts

Well, M16, did you ever stop to consider that one way AZ could do away with the non-resident cap would be to simply say NO NON-RESIDENT HUNTERS, period. They could, you know. Nothing stopping them, per se, certainly not any Texas whining. I'm not advocating such, but they certainly could, and so could any other state--including TX.

29 July 2004, 05:30

Outdoor Writer

Quote:

They could, you know. Nothing stopping them

Only one way they could do that, and that's by changing the law to ban the sale of wildlife and its parts first. Otherwise the above would still be a violation of the Commerce clause because it prevent NRs to take part in the same interstate commerce of hides and antlers, etc. that residents can do. -TONY

29 July 2004, 05:54

DesertRam

Quote:

At the end of the day the only thing the USO lawsuit is going to do is raise non-resident rates; perhaps even the hunting license itself which is a prereq to getting a bonus point.

This is kinda what I see happening. Even if the cap is removed, how many NRs are going to pony up 5 grand for a tag? An elevated price is a de facto cap, and should comply with (at least) the "spirit" of this ruling. That's still complying with the interstate commerce clause, because after all the state would only be adjusting the price to decrease demand to more closely match supply. That's what happens in an unregulated (i.e. no cap) enterprise system. If they can't cap it by percentage, they'll cap it by price. It's working for gasoline, why not big game tags. As a NR, I wouldn't hold it against them, even though it means I could never hunt elk in AZ.

29 July 2004, 06:07

Paul B

Ain't all of this shit grand? Regardless of whether Arizona's draw was fair or not, look at the divisiveness that fucking liberal judge has caused. I wonder if he's a closet member of PETA? That liberal son of a bitch has literally destroyed hunting in the west and you dumb asses are all bickering about the "fairness" or lack thereof on how Arizona doles out tags.
I'm a damned resident and have been for 26 years, and I've been able to hunt my own fucking state exactly six times because of that damned draw system. I'm a person who lives to hunt with limited means, so in state hunting is about all I can afford. And then the damned state doesn't give me a tag. You think you're pissed? Do you think I even care?
I went on my first deer hunt when I was eleven. I have never missed a year since, until I made the mistake of moving to Arizona with it's draw system and four day hunting seasons. I have to admit, the move wasn't my idea, but was a job transfer.
Believe me, if I could afford to move to a non-draw state, I'd be gone so damn quick I'd leave a vapor trail.
That's neither here nor there. The point is, if we are going to save hunting in the west, you nonresidents are going to have to back down some. In your selfish attitude, you are the ones screwing it up for everybody else.
I damn well really cannot afford it, but I'd be willing to pay a hell of a lot more for my tags and keep all nonresidents the hell out. None. Nada.
Of course that'll never happen.
I'm a Hunter Education instructor for the state of Arizona. I see these eager faces learning how to do it right, then graduate from the class, with the realization that thanks to that son of a bitch judge, those kids probably have little or no chance of getting tags.
Thank you judge and U.S. Outfitter for fucking up the whole deal. Hippe you all burn in hell.
Paul B.

as hell!

29 July 2004, 07:52

Outdoor Writer

Hey Paul. I feel your pain with this. But just a suggestion -- how's about leaving the gutter language to guys like RMK? You're an intelligent person and can surely make the same points without it.

There's a time and a place for it, and in my opinion a public forum isn't either. -TONY

29 July 2004, 08:09

Arts

AMEN!!!