How do you determine whether to have a unit be a controlled hunt or an over the counter type hunt? Is it related to access or population?

That’s an excellent question, but not an easy one to answer because there are a lot of factors involved in that decision. 

Fish and Game strives to offer a variety of hunts because hunters are seeking a wide variety of experiences. Of course, we all want to hunt the prime areas of the state for a mature bull or buck and not have a lot of other hunters around, and if a hunter is lucky, he or she may get exactly that, but there are always tradeoffs.

And we might add there are basically two kinds of controlled hunts. One is where the number of hunters is controlled to provide a better hunting experience. The other is where the number of tags is limited, such as antlerless hunts, in order to limit the number of animals harvested.

When deciding whether to offer a controlled hunt, Fish and Game Commission and department wildlife managers try to balance hunters’ desires that are often mutually exclusive, such as the opportunity to hunt every year, but also have the opportunity for a “premium” hunt.

This balancing act is tricky, and to be frank, rarely satisfies everyone. So with all that in mind, let’s get to the meat of your question.

Hunters have repeatedly told us through surveys and direct contact that they want the opportunity to hunt deer and elk every year, which is why most of the state is open to general season hunting.

The decision to offer controlled hunts often revolves around several questions. The first question to be answered – whether it’s a controlled hunt or general – is whether the herds can sustain the harvest. That always comes first.

Then there’s the question of whether the area provides the opportunity for the experience a hunter wants, and how that hunt meshes with, or adversely effects, other hunts.

For an extreme example, let’s say we took Unit 39, which is one of the most popular deer and elk hunting units in the state, and proposed converting it to a controlled hunt.

We know the people who hunted in Unit 39 during a general season and didn’t draw a tag would have to go elsewhere, which would displace a lot of hunters to benefit a few. That would likely lead to overcrowding in other units, so the tradeoffs probably wouldn’t be worth it.

Another factor is whether the unit can support a hunt that meets hunters’ desires. If the goal is an opportunity to take a trophy-class buck or bull, there needs to be a reasonable chance of that happening. If you exclude some hunters to provide a premium experience, then hunters who draw the tags don’t have that experience, nobody wins.

We also know that after a whole hunting unit or elk zone is converted to a controlled hunt, there’s typically no turning back. The Fish and Game Commission could revert it, but that has not happened in recent memory, so converting a whole unit to a controlled hunt is essentially a permanent decision.

Now that doesn’t mean it’s always either/or because many units or zones have both controlled hunts and general hunts. But we also recognize there are still tradeoffs because there are a limited number of animals and hunting opportunities, so providing a premium opportunity for one hunter typically comes at the expense of another.

Those are the major considerations made between general and controlled hunts, but there are others, and hopefully, that gives you a better understanding of what factors are weighed before making that decision.