Non-resident allocation too high

[horshur]

to be clear in a perfect world non resident hunter would be eligible for 1%..not 10%. World ain't perfect.

[Whonnock Boy]

Irrelevant, and based on each individual draw or allocation, the numbers will change.

chip sit down with a calculator and do the math...I did some a few years ago just got people on here pissed. Look at what the average resident hunter will gain in odds to draw a tag if the guides allotment were to be eliminated. Your number will be a .005% better chance. Be sure that what you are fighting for is a real change cause the troops will riot when the truth comes home...too many won't sit down with a pencil and do a little math. They will insist that if joe outfitter didn't have so many tags I would be hunting. When joe looses the tags they still won't be hunting. Sorry call me selfish but I want to hunt. I am not shitting. Dealing with odds and probabilities is beyond most of your audience. People buy lottery tickets when there is a better chance a stranger off the street give them money. So is the fight worth it? To me no.
Way to many enemies made over this fight..Everyone has lost nobody has won.

[horshur]

You got a plastic kayak? Sit down and do some math.,prove me wrong!

[btridge]

chip sit down with a calculator and do the math...I did some a few years ago just got people on here pissed. Look at what the average resident hunter will gain in odds to draw a tag if the guides allotment were to be eliminated. Your number will be a .005% better chance. Be sure that what you are fighting for is a real change cause the troops will riot when the truth comes home...too many won't sit down with a pencil and do a little math. They will insist that if joe outfitter didn't have so many tags I would be hunting. When joe looses the tags they still won't be hunting. Sorry call me selfish but I want to hunt. I am not shitting. Dealing with odds and probabilities is beyond most of your audience. People buy lottery tickets when there is a better chance a stranger off the street give them money. So is the fight worth it? To me no.
Way to many enemies made over this fight..Everyone has lost nobody has won.

To make a claim like this, I will have to ask you to show what numbers you used and show your math equations so we can see how you arrived at your .005% answer. math is my thing and for the life of me I can't figure out how you arrived at that number.
In simple terms, 100,000 resident hunters gaining .005% opportunity translates to 5 animals....I do beleive that the outfitters quota is alot more that 5 animals.
You might want to go back to your pencil and paper and recalculate your numbers.

[horshur]

Show me..math is your thing put the numbers down.let the chips fall. Have you even picked up a pencil?

[40incher]

The enemies were made when the original allocation policy was dumped so as to invent the new on. The old policy gave the GO's no bottom end. When the GO's got their way with the new policy they still weren't happy so they did an end-run with the Liberal culls and screwed resident hunters even worse.

Time to resurrect the original policy and force the bureaucrats to implement it. That's all that was needed in the first place!!

All the fear-mongering by the GO apologists is getting sillier by the post.

[Whonnock Boy]

Do the math on an island bull elk draw at 200:1, one draw per year, and the outfitter getting 40%. Say a 10 bull harvest every 6 years for both resident and non-resident. Instead of 200:1 at 40%, it would be 133:1 at 10%, if my math is correct.

This doesn't even look at success rates if 75 bull moose are allocated to residents in region 6 let's say, and only on in 3 are successful, that means 225 hunters will get to actually hunt, and hopefully 75 tags are filled. Bump it up to 90 draws, and 270 hunters get to go hunting. That is a significant difference.

What about kamloops sheep? 1000:1? With those odds, a non resident should never be able to hunt that population of animals, period. Cut out the guides quota, and those odds drop to 500:1, or close to it.

Maybe be my math is completely wrong. Show us what you have horshur, as I'm always willing to learn.

[btridge]

Show me..math is your thing put the numbers down.let the chips fall. Have you even picked up a pencil?

100,000 resident hunters X your .005%=5, but the LEH is set up for multiple hunters to have an opportunity to acheive the harvest of the AAH based on success rates, so If the LEH authorization ratio was a mear 5 to1, then of coarse that would mean that your .005% would translate to only ONE animal. Your hypothesis sir is wrong! and yes I have picked up a pencil....Have YOU?

[horshur]

To make a claim like this, I will have to ask you to show what numbers you used and show your math equations so we can see how you arrived at your .005% answer. math is my thing and for the life of me I can't figure out how you arrived at that number.
In simple terms, 100,000 resident hunters gaining .005% opportunity translates to 5 animals....I do beleive that the outfitters quota is alot more that 5 animals.
You might want to go back to your pencil and paper and recalculate your numbers.

Did you read what I said?..odds of getting drawn..not opportunities.

[btridge]

Did you read what I said?..odds of getting drawn..not opportunities.

actually I used YOUR odds to prove your wrong! you might want to go take a math class and try again.