Non-resident big game tag drawing

[wapitibob]

I like point systems and I like the random draw in NM.
If there was a perfect system there wouldn't be a cat fight over resident preference points for elk/deer/Antelope in Wyoming.
Life flows along pretty well if you just accept each states system, understand where you are in the mix and apply accordingly.

 

[Sacrvrrat72]

I am with MuleyFever. I prefer a bonus point system like NV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[realunlucky]

I am with MuleyFever. I prefer a bonus point system like NV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Curious what you prefer about it over the other systems

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Sacrvrrat72]

Everyone gets a shot, but your odds go up exponentially the more points you have. In a preference point state if you are just one year behind you literally have no shot and in some cases that will never change in a lifetime. Could just be I like it because it gives someone like me who is behind in points a better opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[juan trueno]

Meanwhile- we have threads about low Hunter recruitment etc. what’s up- too many hunters or not enough? Seriously. Which is it. If you sell hunting stuff there’s not enough. If you hunt there’s too many. Pretty simple math.

Anyway- I’m not smart enough to know what fixes anything- but I’m smart enough not throw good money away. I’d rather buy a local convict from my town a bus ticket to another state than buy one of there preference points- seems like a better use of the cash but that’s just me.

I think what states should start is
To let you allocate a few points to your second choice- to guarantee it. There’s more money to be made yet. I think that with two tiers of point creep the wolves might finally get to eat it all.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chad E]

I like point systems and I like the random draw in NM.
If there was a perfect system there wouldn't be a cat fight over resident preference points for elk/deer/Antelope in Wyoming.
Life flows along pretty well if you just accept each states system, understand where you are in the mix and apply accordingly.

I totally agree on both points. A perfect system doesn't exist and getting spun up about systems generally just leads to more frustration.
I think another issue is people's complete lack of understanding of how odds work especially in a bonus point system. I hear it all the time in Washington with guys honestly believing this is the year because I've got 10 points and not realizing that gives them a whopping 5% or less chance on hard to draw tags.

 

[realunlucky]

Everyone gets a shot, but your odds go up exponentially the more points you have. In a preference point state if you are just one year behind you literally have no shot and in some cases that will never change in a lifetime. Could just be I like it because it gives someone like me who is behind in points a better opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mathematically this is simply untrue

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[LostArra]

I like point systems and I like the random draw in NM.
If there was a perfect system there wouldn't be a cat fight over resident preference points for elk/deer/Antelope in Wyoming.
Life flows along pretty well if you just accept each states system, understand where you are in the mix and apply accordingly.

Residents paying $57 for an elk tag have a much different perspective on preference points than non-residents. Preference points are nothing more than a fund raiser hiding behind a computer that counts how many times you applied unsuccessfully.

 

[wapitibob]

I could look at it that way but I like to know when I'm going to draw in the states I apply to. Having points and knowing where I am in line does that.

 

[5MilesBack]

Residents paying $57 for an elk tag have a much different perspective on preference points than non-residents. Preference points are nothing more than a fund raiser hiding behind a computer that counts how many times you applied unsuccessfully.

The thing is.....nobody is being forced to buy points, and nobody is being forced to hunt. I accept that I will most likely never hunt in a lot of states, and I definitely won't be hunting in a lot of top units.....even in my own state. I know that, and I accept that. So what do I do? I pick up tags I can get, and hunt what I can. Heck, I see people putting in for almost every western state, which is fine. But I hardly even want to give up a single Colorado elk season to hunt another state, even an OTC season. All this talk about points, and we still have states that offer unlimited OTC elk tags. Unlimited........you can hunt every single year!

I've tried to schedule an OTC Idaho elk hunt, and I never can seem to find a place to slip it into my CO elk schedule. For me, that's too many options. What I really need, is a southern hemisphere elk hunt so I can get another season in, in March.

 

[Trial153]

^ Because some parts arent brokem doesnt mean that you dont try to fix the parts are. There are systems in place that are obviously broken. Broken for who? Not fish and game as they are taking in needed revenue. But broken for the sportmen who are the sorce of the revenue. You dont wait for things to implode before you adresss the issues with the systems. That is a sure why to hand over budgets to states general funds and if that happens we as hunters will lose.

 

[cnelk]

There has to be a way to flush points.

There is, and Colorado tried years ago. It was called 'Banking Points'. But it was only in effect for one year.

For those that dont know, or dont remember, it generally went like this:

Lets say you had 10 PP. And you applied for a unit that took 4 PPs in the draw.
You would lose 4 of your 10 PPs, leaving you with 6 PPs.

This would 'flush' PPs and also address point creep

BUT... it has to be in effect for longer than one year to do any good.

I for one would like to see this be implemented in the next 5 Year Season Structure

 

[5MilesBack]

^ Because some parts arent brokem doesnt mean that you dont try to fix the parts are. There are systems in place that are obviously broken. Broken for who? Not fish and game as they are taking in needed revenue. But broken for the sportmen who are the sorce of the revenue. You dont wait for things to implode before you adresss the issues with the systems. That is a sure why to hand over budgets to states general funds and if that happens we as hunters will lose.

What parts are broken? The states manage their game the way they want and issue a set number of draw tags every year, and a set number of folks get those tags. Seems like that works. The only people losing are those that don't draw. Perhaps if they sent out draw participation awards to all those that didn't draw, folks would be more content???? It's pretty obvious that a lot of folks were raised with that entitlement mentality, and think they're entitled to these tags or something.

 

[Trial153]

What parts are broken? The states manage their game the way they want and issue a set number of draw tags every year, and a set number of folks get those tags. Seems like that works. The only people losing are those that don't draw. Perhaps if they sent out draw participation awards to all those that didn't draw, folks would be more content???? It's pretty obvious that a lot of folks were raised with that entitlement mentality, and think they're entitled to these tags or something.

Is it even possible to have a conversation with you without it eroding into some quasi-political diatribe? I think not.
Yes the system is broken when you are selling points as a product designed to attain tags that can’t be attained based on the system your using. That should clue you into the fact there is a problem. Last I heard pyramid schemes were still illegal. How you or anyone else can say that isn’t the path we are heading down via some states systems is ludicrous. Before you go in into more free market, entitlement rants we need to address that this isn’t all just supply and demand. This a public resource held in trust by the state. Hence the reason tags aren’t all just auctioned to the highest bidder in the first place.
A long term substantive model that provides opportunity for as many diverse hunters as possible while maintaining and growing the resource and providing the funding needed to accomplish that goal is what needed to be established.

 

[NoWiser]

Everyone gets a shot, but your odds go up exponentially the more points you have. In a preference point state if you are just one year behind you literally have no shot and in some cases that will never change in a lifetime. Could just be I like it because it gives someone like me who is behind in points a better opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you need to dig a little deeper into the math behind Nevada's draw. If you just started and think your odds are going up exponentially every year, you couldn't be more wrong. It's more likely your odds are going DOWN every year. But I guess at least they aren't zero.

 

[ChrisS]

What parts are broken?

You wrote upthread that you generally don't bother with other states. You pay your $50 for your resident tag and are done with it. States rely on nonresident funds for a lot of revenue. When non-residents stop purchasing preference points because there is mathematically no shot at receiving a tag, they stop contributing funds to that state to manage their wildlife.

 

[realunlucky]

There is, and Colorado tried years ago. It was called 'Banking Points'. But it was only in effect for one year.

For those that dont know, or dont remember, it generally went like this:

Lets say you had 10 PP. And you applied for a unit that took 4 PPs in the draw.
You would lose 4 of your 10 PPs, leaving you with 6 PPs.

This would 'flush' PPs and also address point creep

BUT... it has to be in effect for longer than one year to do any good.

I for one would like to see this be implemented in the next 5 Year Season Structure

How would you base how many points it takes to draw that unit? If you use last year's numbers you have artificially stopped point creep.
You think letting someone bump down and hunt a "lesser" a couple years in a row will eliminate Colorado point drama vs a draw once and be done approach? In that case you now allow a single point holders presence to continue to spread for multiple years basically adding to the number of people in the pool not subtracting from it.
Colorado should allow for groups to combine and avg points rather than use lowest point holders number only, this provides a way for older hunters to take newer hunters out and families to hunt together still.
I will agree a change is coming to Colorado system as it's barely viable now.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[cnelk]

You think letting someone bump down and hunt a "lesser" a couple years in a row will eliminate Colorado point drama vs a draw once and be done approach?

Yes.
Because both Residents and NonRes suffer from the 'No-Mans Land' for draws.
Point Banking would address this

 

[cnelk]

Colorado should allow for groups to combine and avg points rather than use lowest point holders number only, this provides a way for older hunters to take newer hunters out and families to hunt together still.

Bingo

 

[realunlucky]

Yes.
Because both Residents and NonRes suffer from the 'No-Mans Land' for draws.
Point Banking would address this

Where do the people that could draw those tags now go when the no man's land point holders draw it multiple years in a row?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk