Understanding the moose validation tag draw

[biflora]

I thought I had a good understanding of the moose tag draw but now after the number of tags have been reduced for the unit I'm hunting, I got all confused. My question is: there is no guaranteed group size so the draw goes automatically to the second step: large group allocation. What happens if the Hunter:Tag ratio is bigger than 15 where 15 is the maximum number of the hunters in a group ? It goes automatically to next step random allocation ? In this case, an individual person that is not even part of group, or let's say it's part of a group of two can very well get a tag while a group of 15 can end up without tag ? Am I right ?

[SK33T3R]

My understanding (IMO) is that the large group allocation is only used when there are excess tags after the guaranteed group size are satisfied. BUT there needs to be more excess tag numbers then the number of large groups for a particular number.. If there is, then all the entrants in that large group are satisfied. When there are more large groups then tags then ALL those remaining tags go into the individual draw. If an individual gets a tag then ALL the members in his group get yanked ....
Any units with a guaranteed group size issues all tags to individuals and yanks out their members if in a group. If a tag goes to some guys wife or brother in-law then there is a right of transfer. SO.. any individual would be wise to go into a group of two with his "ghost" hunter. This way you're in for 2 draws and you'll end up with the tag anyway. Any hunters in these WMUs without guaranteed group tags would be wise to "play" the game. If you're not doing it then you're not in the majority.
There's no way the MNR will deviate from this tag allotment process. It's too lucrative.
We don't write the rules! We just play the game.

[Ali88]

So, in reading this, your saying that if you have multiple hunters you go into a large group, so a group of 2 has the same chance as a group of 7 of receiving a tag, so if we have 10 guys and there is no guarantee we are better to put in 5 groups of 2, the only downfall would be getting 5 tags ???

[biflora]

My understanding (IMO) is that the large group allocation is only used when there are excess tags after the guaranteed group size are satisfied. BUT there needs to be more excess tag numbers then the number of large groups for a particular number.. If there is, then all the entrants in that large group are satisfied. When there are more large groups then tags then ALL those remaining tags go into the individual draw. If an individual gets a tag then ALL the members in his group get yanked ....
Any units with a guaranteed group size issues all tags to individuals and yanks out their members if in a group. If a tag goes to some guys wife or brother in-law then there is a right of transfer. SO.. any individual would be wise to go into a group of two with his "ghost" hunter. This way you're in for 2 draws and you'll end up with the tag anyway. Any hunters in these WMUs without guaranteed group tags would be wise to "play" the game. If you're not doing it then you're not in the majority.
There's no way the MNR will deviate from this tag allotment process. It's too lucrative.
We don't write the rules! We just play the game.

Could you please explain what 2 draws are you talking about ( see bold letters in your post). Please keep in mind that in my initial post I said the ratio hunters / tags is higher than 15 so large group allocation doesn't apply ( at least this is what I think).

Thank you

[rick_iles]

It was explained to me last year that if your group did not meet the guaranteed group size, you went into the pool of individuals.
We have always applied in a group, even when we didn’t meet the group size. We always got at least one tag. The danger in everyone applying individually is if you end up with two or even three tags. I know of a group of 8 that applied individually and ended up with three tags. That pretty much cuts down on their chances for the next year.
With the tag cuts, getting tags is a crap shoot ! We used to be able to count on one tag, not so much now.....

[redd foxx]

It's always best to apply in a group because you have a chance at a group tag if you meet the right #. When the draw occurs, if every group of 15 qualify for a tag, they will all get one. Then each group of 14 is considered, then 13, etc. until there aren't enough tags to give all a particular group # a tag. After that, all group applicants are thrown in as individuals with those who applied individually, for what is left. So if you apply in a group you basically have 2 chances at a tag. And if you're in a group and someone gets picked, there is someone designated to transfer the tag to.

[biflora]

I have read the section dedicated to understanding the moose tag validation draw at least 4 times and I can tell you there are grey areas.
For instance, I'll take a random WMU, let's say WMU 5 which has a quota of 69 cows and a guaranteed group size of 9 for cow tag. Hypothetically it can happen to have 70-80 groups ( higher number than the quota) with 9 pool 1 hunters that apply for a cow tag. So what happens ? Is the quota suddenly increased ? At all fairness, it should be because all these groups applied for this WMU because they knew a guaranteed tag is issued if they had 9 hunters or more. Now some will say, what is the probability for this to happen ? I don't know but at least in theory it can happen.

For the same WMU5, the table at the page 51 "2017 Adult Moose Tag Draw Gun Quotas and Applications" it says that 474 applicants for G-Bull ( gun bull choice 1) applied for 38 tags. There is no guaranteed group size for this WMU. This means 474 hunters divided by the numbers of tags 38 = 12.47 . This means each group with 13+ pool 1 members should've received a tag. However in the table at the page 49 the table " Gun Guaranteed Group Size for 2018 " the column called "In 2017, all groups of this size and larger were issued tags", for bull the result is " none". In my mind there one explanation : there was no one single group that had 13 + pool 1 members, otherwise I can't explain this " none".
I think I killed you with these numbers but I'm sure some of you will understand my frustration.

@ Rick_iles : I'm quoting you " It was explained to me last year that if your group did not meet the guaranteed group size, you went into the pool of individuals." Whoever explained this to you didn't do a good job because in between the guaranteed group size and random draw ( your pool of individuals) there is another step called Large group allocation. You're perfectly right about the possibility of getting more than one tag when you break your larger group into smaller groups of let's say 2 hunters. This indeed could turn into a great disadvantage at the next year draw when you loose the proportional number of pool 1 hunters with the number of tags won current year.

[jaycee]

Once the quotas are set , they are not increased or decreased.

The system is self explanatory re steps one through five of the draw.

The draws are done by computer and if you have the guaranteed group size required, you are more than likely to get a tag , but not necessarily, as I know of groups that have had the require number in the group but have not been lucky enough to get tags for the last 2 years. They applied in tough areas.

After the guaranteed group size draw is filled [depending on the number of tags available, it goes ti step two , the large group allocation, when that is done and if there are still tags left, the draw then goes into the random draw allocation , small groups and individual applications , till all tags are drawn.

Northern Residents have a separate draw , as a small percentage of the tags are held back for the draw for them , [residents only in wmu's 1 to 42]

Info for 2016 ;
Total Tags Available;10,757
Total Applicants entered in draw; 85,499
Total Successful Applicants; 9,692 , which left 65 surplus tags that were available first come first served.

Apply and take your chances like everyone else.

[SK33T3R]

Jaycee
Info for 2016 ;
Total Tags Available;10,757
Total Successful Applicants; 9,692 , which left 65 surplus tags that were available first come first served.

Total Applicants entered in draw; 85,499 ...[COLOR=#FF0000]BUT a percentage of these don't actually hunt!

We all know what I'm talking about!

[SK33T3R]

Could you please explain what 2 draws are you talking about ( see bold letters in your post). Please keep in mind that in my initial post I said the ratio hunters / tags is higher than 15 so large group allocation doesn't apply ( at least this is what I think).
SO.. any individual would be wise to go into a group of two with his "ghost" hunter. This way you're in for 2 draws and you'll end up with the tag anyway.
Thank you

How can I explain this? Hmmm Rules are written for just about everything in life. You need to understand that the MNR at most times is a source of income for the gov't. Maybe the income doesn't cover the expenses but it is still a source of income. More tags sold equals more money. There have been tags bought by hunters wives and in-laws and co-workers for years. Using these tags inappropriately is an offence and rightly so. But along comes the moose draw and the MNR just allows it to happen with the tag transfers. Heck they even get an extra $10 for it now! The rules are printed right there for everyone to see.
So to answer your question.
It is to your advantage to get a non moose hunter to buy a tag. It takes 2 yrs of this before he/she is in pool1. When you both apply as a group of 2 you get 2 chances at the random draw. If you get the tag great. If he gets the tag then you'll be the transfer person. Winner! winner! Chicken dinner!
Is all this morally right! Not in my mind BUT you're dealing with a gov't that has no morals anyway. Follow the money. If the MNR cut out the transfer completely they would suffer monetarily and that IS ALL THAT MATTERS!
Sure it costs more to get a tag but the alternative is $500 plus a guide in Quebec, or more to Newfoundland. How about a deal from an Ontario outfitter with tags. NOT!

I've played a lot of sports over the years and knowing the rules intimately and playing those rules fairly is often what separates the winners from losers.