2013 Archery Mule deer going on Draw

[Cowtown guy]

After reading this whole thread something occurred to me....

I can't remember the last time I was called! I would bet it was more then 3 years ago.

I get that the info used is only as good as the info given. That only makes sense. My question is where are my stats being taken into all of this? I purchase a bow permit every year. I haven't been successful in 5 or 6 years though. I just phoned the old man and he said he hasn't been called either.

That is a tad troubling is it not?

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

After reading this whole thread something occurred to me....

I can't remember the last time I was called! I would bet it was more then 3 years ago.

I get that the info used is only as good as the info given. That only makes sense. My question is where are my stats being taken into all of this? I purchase a bow permit every year. I haven't been successful in 5 or 6 years though. I just phoned the old man and he said he hasn't been called either.

That is a tad troubling is it not?

They stopped the phone surveys 3 years ago..........You are supposed to complete your survey on-line. If you are registered on Alberta Relm you would have got the info.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

After reading this whole thread something occurred to me....

I can't remember the last time I was called! I would bet it was more then 3 years ago.

I get that the info used is only as good as the info given. That only makes sense. My question is where are my stats being taken into all of this? I purchase a bow permit every year. I haven't been successful in 5 or 6 years though. I just phoned the old man and he said he hasn't been called either.

That is a tad troubling is it not?

No calls anymore...emails online only

LC

[Kick1]

I'm curious to know that if the draw(or when) is set up, how would they set it up. Would it potentailly be like our Antelope draw is. Archery Antelope/ Trophy Antelope. Would there be different priority's to get drawn. I known there is lower priority with archery vs rifle. Would it be one draw and you can hunt archery during that season and when rifle opens up you can only use rifle?. I believe if they keep it general and had the manditory registration then we could have alot better counts on what the harvest number's are.

Originally Posted by Kick1

I'm curious to know that if the draw(or when) is set up, how would they set it up. Would it potentailly be like our Antelope draw is. Archery Antelope/ Trophy Antelope. Would there be different priority's to get drawn. I known there is lower priority with archery vs rifle. Would it be one draw and you can hunt archery during that season and when rifle opens up you can only use rifle?..

No decision has been made on how the draw would set up. Seperate draws is one of the options.

[Dr Death]

It is unacceptable that any changes be proposed with such weak data to support it. Most feel the harvest stats are far from perfect, but it is "the best info we have to go on". Fact is in WMU 404 there were 2 confirmed archery kills last year which when 'interpreted' into the big picture (by SRD) means there were 40 archery kills and far surpasses the 15% cap.

Anyone with even half a brain can see this conclusion is flawed and very wrong. It should not sit well with anyone. Surveys are a valuable tool, but when major changes are proposed based on this type/amount of info we should ALL be outraged. "Based on the best information we have" simply does not cut it. It is completely irresponsible and gross mismanagement by SRD if the changes happen without proper data!

I'm with WB in speculating there is a push from somewhere else for these changes. Why else would they even discuss changes with such pathetic and virtually non-existant data? I smell a rat! Just because there is no stakeholder at the AGMAG that doesn't come right out and say they want changes does not mean there isn't one. We live in a world where back room deals and politics and $$ run the show.

I'm sure not all of the zones proposed for draw have as weak data as wmu404, but I would really like to know the actual survey numbers for all the zones. Ask SRD and you won't likely get an answer as they don't want to admit what weak info they have.

There is one simple solution to all of this......mandatory surveys.

Originally Posted by Dr Death

There is one simple solution to all of this......mandatory surveys.

I'm not saying I disagree with mandatory surveys but there's certainly no guarantee of accuracy with them. If the current system is flawed...are mandatory surveys a fix or do we just get a greater amount of inaccurate data. With some of the talk in this thread and others, I'm not sure how honest some hunters would be.

[Cowtown guy]

Well no wonder. I have never seen those surveys. Gotta go looking for them for next year.

[walking buffalo]

I wonder what position interest groups sitting at AGMAG are taking on this discussion?

What is the position of the AFGA?
APOS?
ABA?
SCI Alberta?


I suggest members of these groups ask for a written position statement and confirm how their representatives will vote on proposed changes. Please post up any replies. We might be surprised with some of the answers.

[Cowtown guy]

Heres a question though. 5 guys in the group I hunt with. I'm the only one under 60. I am also the only one likely to turn on a computer without blowing it up. How does that come into play?

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

Heres a question though. 5 guys in the group I hunt with. I'm the only one under 60. I am also the only one likely to turn on a computer without blowing it up. How does that come into play?

If you aren't registered on Relm......you don't get surveyed.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

If you aren't registered on Relm......you don't get surveyed.

Another most excellent "feature" of the survey....

LC

[Dr Death]

Of course the survey results would not be 100% accurate, but it is safe to say they would be infinately closer to the real numbers than what they currently have. We can't just say people will lie so lets just not bother to do it. No system is perfect.

Originally Posted by Dr Death

No system is perfect.

Exactly.....

So people are always going to pick holes in the system when it affects them negatively.....regardless of the system. At the end of the day, it's the degree of imperfection and how it affects the stats that matters. In an imperfect system, there is typically a formula for error. That's what stats are all about.

[Dr Death]

Agreed, but to a point. You can't honestly say that a handfull of hunter survey responses from 1 zone is just as 'flawed' as a whole bunch of responses that may or may not be truthful?

I would really like to see the actual numbers. Are they getting a 5, 10, 20, 50% survey response in some of the zones? Maybe 50% is acceptable. If they are only single digit responses...well obviously they are seriously innaccurate.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dr Death

Agreed, but to a point. You can't honestly say that a handfull of hunter survey responses from 1 zone is just as 'flawed' as a whole bunch of responses that may or may not be truthful?

I would really like to see the actual numbers. Are they getting a 5, 10, 20, 50% survey response in some of the zones? Maybe 50% is acceptable. If they are only single digit responses...well obviously they are seriously innaccurate.

X2.....at some point things become statistically invalid due to a low or unrepresentative response....

LC

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

X2.....at some point things become statistically invalid due to a low or unrepresentative response....

LC

Absolutely.....so are we at that point?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Absolutely.....so are we at that point?

I don't know the numer of possible responses vs. the number of actual responses to know if it fits the bill or not....do you?

Does SRD consider this when they come up with their numbers? From what Dr. D. has stated about the survey results in one zone it seems they don't statistically eliminate anything....

LC

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I don't know the numer of possible responses vs. the number of actual responses to know if it fits the bill or not....do you?

LC

No but I haven't been saying the system is flawed either...I just thought by your responses that you were basing your opinion on something....

Does SRD consider this when they come up with their numbers? From what Dr. D. has stated about the survey results in one zone it seems they don't statistically elimate anything....

Either that or they were showing raw data....I honestly don't know...I haven't seen the presentation. I would hope they consider an error factor when looking at the numbers.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

No but I haven't been saying the system is flawed either...I just thought by your responses that you were basing your opinion on something....

Nope just my opinion

I don't get all the insider information like some folks are privy to...

LC

[The Bit Runner.]

Originally Posted by Dr Death

It is unacceptable that any changes be proposed with such weak data to support it. Most feel the harvest stats are far from perfect, but it is "the best info we have to go on". Fact is in WMU 404 there were 2 confirmed archery kills last year which when 'interpreted' into the big picture (by SRD) means there were 40 archery kills and far surpasses the 15% cap.

Anyone with even half a brain can see this conclusion is flawed and very wrong. It should not sit well with anyone. Surveys are a valuable tool, but when major changes are proposed based on this type/amount of info we should ALL be outraged. "Based on the best information we have" simply does not cut it. It is completely irresponsible and gross mismanagement by SRD if the changes happen without proper data!

I'm with WB in speculating there is a push from somewhere else for these changes. Why else would they even discuss changes with such pathetic and virtually non-existant data? I smell a rat! Just because there is no stakeholder at the AGMAG that doesn't come right out and say they want changes does not mean there isn't one. We live in a world where back room deals and politics and $$ run the show.

I'm sure not all of the zones proposed for draw have as weak data as wmu404, but I would really like to know the actual survey numbers for all the zones. Ask SRD and you won't likely get an answer as they don't want to admit what weak info they have.

There is one simple solution to all of this......mandatory surveys.

Sheep,

With this info do you think they are doing the right thing here? If you were on the board and you were told and shown this info like the wmu 404 info would you be on board with putting the mule deer on draw.

I have always filled in the surveys and will continue too but this kind of info will, I guarantee put a real bad taste in alot of peoples mouths. Basically what the SRD are saying is they could realy care less on what they recieve they will make the call anyways, What a JOKE!!!!!

Originally Posted by The Bit Runner.

Sheep,

With this info do you think they are doing the right thing here? If you were on the board and you were told and shown this info like the wmu 404 info would you be on board with putting the mule deer on draw.

I wasn't there and we are hearing the poster's interpretation of the presentation. Perhaps there was more context to it....perhaps not....I honestly don't know but it does make me want to know more for sure but I'm also not going to base my opinion on it.

I ask again...why has there been no large outrage about moose and elk going on the draw the past couple years. I'm sure it's based on the same info. Could it be that there really are that many more mule deer hunters? Do you truly believe that archers aren't killing more than 15% of the mule deer bucks in some WMUs? Is it really that hard to fathom that one buck was killed on a general tag in WMU 106 for example. We are only talking a couple deer is some zones. This proposal is not for a province-wide draw. Only WMUs exceeding 15% harvest by archers.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by The Bit Runner.

Sheep,

With this info do you think they are doing the right thing here? If you were on the board and you were told and shown this info like the wmu 404 info would you be on board with putting the mule deer on draw.

I have always filled in the surveys and will continue too but this kind of info will, I guarantee put a real bad taste in alot of peoples mouths. Basically what the SRD are saying is they could realy care less on what they recieve they will make the call anyways, What a JOKE!!!!!

I agree.....basically they are interpolating the data to represent the entire population of the survey when infact statistically the response is so low it is not statistically valid....(assuming the information Dr. D. is giving is correct, which there is no reason to doubt at this point)

LC

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I agree.....basically they are interpolating the data to represent the entire population of the survey when infact statistically the response is so low it is not statistically valid....(assuming the information Dr. D. is giving is correct, which there is no reason to doubt at this point)

LC

Huh...he said he had no idea how many hunters responded.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I ask again...why has there been no large outrage about moose and elk going on the draw the past couple years. I'm sure it's based on the same info. Could it be that there really are that many more mule deer hunters?

Part of the moose thing is I think hunters understood that the moose were hit hard with ticks, hard winters, inclusion of cows in the general archery season, etc. Most hunters in those circumstances understood the reasoning behind it....read the thread on the 337/338 draws thats here....you will see where I stand on that issue.

Another thing is I would say moose are way easier to hunt with the bow during general season time frames (during the rut) than mule deer are so I can understand where the archers hit the magic % number when it came to moose.

Also the moose zones that remained open to general were hit extremely hard due to the closures of other zones in close proximity and the proximity to a major center.....348, 507....to name a few.

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Huh...he said he had no idea how many hunters responded.

Dr. D stated....

...2 confirmed archery kills....last time I checked 2 is a number?

hypothetically....if only 2 responded total and they were both archery kills that would give a 100% rate....hardly representative or "real"....

Clearly you support a draw, and clearly some others would like to figure out HOW they arrived at these numbers....I fall in the latter...

I support basing the decision on real, representative numbers....I would support a mandatory survey compliance.

LC

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Dr. D stated....

...2 confirmed archery kills....last time I checked 2 is a number?

LC

And if that is what we were talking about you'd have a point......

You said that he said

when infact statistically the response is so low it is not statistically valid.

When in fact he said

I would really like to see the actual numbers.

The fact is, you don't know what the response is nor did Dr. D claim he did. Nice try though. When you say, "infact" it typically means that there is indeed a fact.

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Clearly you support a draw, and clearly some others would like to figure out HOW they arrived at these numbers....I fall in the latter...

LC

Please don't put words in my mouth and it shows a total lack of respect. Infact, I've said several times in the thread that a draw should be the last resort. I support each user group getting an appropriate percentage of harvest based on the percentage of participants. There may be other means of acheiving this other than a draw as walking buffalo pointed out. Got it??

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dr Death

When questioned directly about that zone one of the bios said there were over 40 antlered mule deer harvested by archers last year and only 10 by rifle hunters! When asked where those number were derived from they admitted there were less than 10 hunters total who answered the survey for 404 and that indeed the harvest estimates are very unreliable due to lack of response.

This was the information I was basing my statements on....comments Dr. D. made early in the thread. Maybe you skimmed over it? He then stated that in that zone there were 2 confirmed archery kills.....

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Please don't put words in my mouth and it shows a total lack of respect. Infact, I've said several times in the thread that a draw should be the last resort. I support each user group getting an appropriate percentage of harvest based on the percentage of participants. There may be other means of acheiving this other than a draw as walking buffalo pointed out. Got it??

Apologies TJ, no lack of respect meant....you have not been immune to putting words in other peoples mouths either

....you insinuated in another thread that I suggested people should not fill out the survey which I did not say and do not support.

LC