It's obvious in many ways the systems are flawed, but what would you rather have or do? Not just because you may or may not have any points in certain states, but what is a remedy for it...Do away with them, go straight draw, may the best person win?
Some states have played with how tags are awarded to point holders, but if a state just came out and said 'that's it' we're doing away with points, what would be the outcome...Besides a riot!!! Lol
IMO, every preference point should be a bonus point if it reaches 10 preference points. Some things work for preference points - specifically deer. Preference points for things like sheep/goat/bison/moose are ridiculous.
I play the hand dealt me in my appl states......sometimes ya win some times ya don't
PS A pair of 'Ike's' first two posters...….hmmmmm
As for the high demand species, I don't have an answer....other than it makes me cringe every time a state changes the rules and puts the screws to those vested in the process.
I wouldn’t mind seeing a draw for a limited number of Wyoming Non Res Wilderness elk licenses.
Are my ideas unrealistic? ;-)
Part of me also likes New Mexico where there are no points.
Nebraska is a true bonus point system for elk. However many points you have is how many names you have in the hat. I like that except that I haven’t drawn yet....!
Preference points are for the birds anymore.
The breaking point will be when the gap between the have and have nots becomes so great that it’s no longer appealing to apply for a tag. We are not far from 40 point differentials between applicants. Who would apply knowing others have tried for 40 years and knowing you are that many years behind.
Sure, Idaho may have the best system, but other states just converting to a straight random draw across the board is a no-go. I don’t think it would be even remotely fair to simply tell those with years and years of points that they are all now worthless and btw - “Thanks for playing!”
With that said I'm happy to be in Idaho without a point system and hope we never go to one. I would apply for way more states and tags if they were a random draw and not a point system.
Do the draw random by species and by game unit. I hate the thought of only getting to apply for only one species. Paying by check would only bog things down and create a hassle - expect months for results to be posted.
Points, no points - all the same if it doesn't guarantee a tag eventually. A guy builds points for 20 years and draws. A guy applies for 20 years in a random and finally draws. Same thing, other than no one gets to talk about that point creep nonsense.
To phase it out fairly would take years, you just stop issuing points. Each year the points needed to draw will drop (may take more than 1 year), but eventually all points are gone and you are into whatever the new model is
IMO, the only true problem is preference points for OIL hunts. That's what truly excludes future applicants to the life-long benefit of those who got in year 1.
Supply and demand. That is what controls the game. Where there are lots and lots and lots of applicants, we will always dislike the process because WE don't have a rats ass of a chance of getting picked!
You can not devise a system where even 1000 guys apply for 10 tags and have it come out where any one person has a decent chance of getting picked. Simple math tells you that. In my ideal system for high demand units, they would award 20% of the tags to the people who have the most "bonus" points, and double or square the number of points for the rest of us in a lottery.
Preference points suck because it blocks out the new hunters and young.
F&G are the new casinos and application fees are the new drug for them. Point systems lock in applicants even in economic downturns as you should be sitting out the draw and feeding your family but then would fall another point behind and pint creep and my gosh I need to gamble just a bit more. I do not have a gambling problem, I have a pint creep problem.
Point systems merely shift who gets the tags and is nothing fair about this discriminatory approach that offers the general population a benefit over pure random combined with wait periods.
Do random then each applicant gets only one application choice per species. Otherwise everyone will put a top unit as first choice then have a safety choice with higher odds and this kills the top unit odds. Have a secondary draw for leftover tags for anyone that did not draw a tag in the initial draw.
No tag money required up front and have 7 days after draw to submit payment in full. If unable to pay for tag then goes to next in line and they have 3 business days. No need to make tag application just for the well-to-do folks. You have to be in financial shape to pay if drawn but no requirement to front the full tag for every species, especially when very unlikely would draw every species in a given year.
Say there is a random draw across the board and you draw a species in a unit that had 90 people apply for 30 tags the prior year. 90/30 is 3. 3x as many people applied for that tag so should take 3 years for those applicants to eventually draw. You can apply in that "3x" unit this year but if draw you know you then will have to wait 3 years to apply again for that species. No matter if harvest or not. 3 years. For example, if your sheep tag was 2 in 400 then you wait 200 years so is effectively one in a lifetime.
Apply for an easy to draw pronghorn unit then you might be hunting pronghorn every 2nd year. Hold out for the best unit in the state and draw that tag then you will be waiting a decade or more to apply again. The applicants that prefer to hunt often can select a unit wait time based on that and the applicants that want a chance at a big ole monster can consider the wait period that will result if they draw. The market will create as fair a draw system as possible since the system gives fair warning of how long will take to draw and then takes a successful applicant out of the pool for that length of time.
I also dislike states that set aside tags for any subset of hunters such as youth, elderly, veterans, disabled etc. We are all special. We share the same lanes on the highway so why can't we share the same bucket of tags? That includes non-residents. Charge them 10x the resident tag price and let the market decide the allocation that goes to residents vs. non-residents. Washington state has this approach.
If a state has to divide up tags between residents and non-residents then make it a set 20% of tags in a separate non-resident draw rather than an "up to" cap.
Wait, wait, but I want a point system since I fear random being "fair.
Okay. Here you go. If the number of applicants is more than 10x the available tags for a species then award bonus points for that species. Cap at 15 points. If you do not draw then in 16th year are capped at 15. Square the points so for 15 years you get an out-sized number of balls in the hopper compared to anyone a year or more behind you. This lets new applicants catch up in a reasonable amount of years and most applicants will typically never draw a tag for the species anyway. Think Arizona sheep.
If the number of applicants is 10x or less then award preference points. Cap at 25 points which will only impact a few units anyway that are the blue ribbon units. 90% of applicants are drawing in a decade or so. Think Wyoming pronghorn.
If you obtain a tag for a species then your points fall to zero. Draw the tag, buy a landowner tag, raffle or auction tag, etc, then you go to zero points for that species. Think how Colorado is negatively impacted where applicants can build elk and deer points for two more more decades while still hunting elk or deer most years.
You can only apply for one high demand tag. A high demand tag is any tag that had 20x or greater demand the prior year or is expected to have 20x demand if is a new tag. That high demand tag might be a sheep, goat, moose, rut elk tag, rut deer, etc but you only can apply for one of those. Otherwise, can apply for a unit with under 20x demand for each species. I may elect to use my 20x or greater on a sheep tag then apply for middling elk, deer and pronghorn units. You might opt for a rut bull elk rifle tag and a middling deer and pronghorn unit. Again, the market will allow applicants to chase their dream with full knowledge there are tradeoffs. Otherwise, applicants spray choices for every species even if do not care that much for a mountain goat or rut deer rifle tag but figure might as well toss a chance in the hat. They then can end up with a tag someone else would treasure and want more than any other tag but have crappy odds due to all the "well, might as well shoot for the moon" while applying for every specie.
No transferring of points.
No limit on party application size other than need to be enough tags offered for the size of your group. If drawn and not enough tags then do not get any tags and is treated as if not drawn for point accumulation.
If are part of a party application that gets tags then no refunds or point reinstatements unless the entire party turns in tags.
Treewalker I enjoyed reading your post. Many good ideas in there. Unfortunately, it’s more about money than fairness these days I’m afraid.
Also, sometimes the only way a kiddo can hunt before they hit adulthood and life starts to get in the way is through youth only hunts. I'm all for them. That is the only reason why my kids get to hunt this year is because they flunked the normal hunt test this year, again.
The veteran thing is a completely different conversation and would spark outrage if continued...
And therein lies the problem. "I will agree to any change that DOESN'T negatively affect me." We all have something we don't like about our current system, but we also have some things we do like. The problem is, they're not the same for everyone. And lets remember, the CPW isn't putting it up for a vote.
Several youth only hunts are at the stupidest times of the year anyway or very limited geographically and really don't have the advantage of stealing that trophy quality animal from some big bad ass adult hunter with more time and resources available and who's hunt is at a better time.
Things have changed and most states [out west] have gone to a draw. If anyone wants to get a kid interested in hunting, you gotta give them opportunity and they can rabbit hunt only so much before it gets old. Most of us hunted as a youth OTC. It ain't like that anymore...