I do like this…

I do like this recommendation; however, I have concerns not specified with the proposal.

1) What loop holes might become apparent that would allow hunters to skip ahead to achieve more at shorter intervals? For example, party hunting applicants can draw upon members with an outdoors card without the intention of hunting with the group, to meet minimum applicant numbers to secure a tag. How will having "ghost" hunters be any different with the new proposal, as members wishing to skew the system may find a way.

2) What is anticipated / modeled as the average lag between successful tag allocations to an individual that accumulates points each year as part of the application process?

3) I recommend looking at other jurisdictions in the USA to understand the preference points system and implications towards non-consecutive years of tag applications and point allotments.

4) Funding generated from the sale of moose licences continues to dwindle, which directly impacts the ability to complete Moose Aerial Inventories (MAIs) within meaningful times frames. Given the current resource model, what is the expected financial decline to the Special Purpose Account (SPA) from net sale of applications fees?

5) The proposed varying costs per successful tag type based on age and sex has not been disclosed. What is anticipated to be a feasible cost per tag type? What are expected fall out from resource user if tags are too expensive to compensate for a reduction to the SPA from application fees used to implement MAIs?

6) Can a person still party hunt if they did not apply to the draw, but prefer to purchase a tag over the counter?