Instituting a pure PP system is a mistake, whenever it includes high demand tags.
CO has that problem and WY will end up with the exact same problem that CO has, 20 to 30 years from now.
Now, there's probably more residents applying in CO than WY (although CO has more elk than WY, but WY has more quality zones then CO) which will eat up a lot of the max folks and delay/slow point creep, but what'll happen is in 20 years, WY will be having the same discussions CO is having, in that, people who are just being born right now will not have a chance at upper end tags until they're very old men, if ever and people who started applying 5-10 yrs after the system was put in place are looking for somewhere to spend their points as they feel they'll never have a shot at the top end units (ala 2 and even 61, with their run-away point creep).
Pure PP systems greatly favor the people who get in when the system is instituted and that disparity increases the more in-demand the tag is.
Even a PP system with a partial random pool greatly favors the people who were putting in when the system was instituted, and here's how:
Take the example of California. CA has a PP system with 75% going to max PP and 25% random instituted 12 yrs ago for elk/sheep and 11 yrs ago for deer. For high demand tags like sheep, elk, and a few of the deer tags, when that system was put in place and people continued putting in for the high demand tags, they held on to max points.
Then, if you get into the game even a couple years after the system is instituted, look what happens: An example of a typical sheep zone looks like this: 2-4 tags given out, so 1-3 go to max PP points folks and one to random. Max PP folks who don't draw also go into the random pool.
So in this example sheep zone with 4 tags, 2000 people apply, 700 of whom are max points. They have a 1 in 175 chance of drawing a tag in the PP round. Then they go into the random round with the rest of us, who have a 1 in 1,997 chance of drawing the last tag.
Ten years from now, since there's not enough tags to go around, now the max people have 21 points, only 30 of them have drawn so there's still 670 of them, but the random pool continues to swell. Even if the same people kept applying, after 11 years of applying, a new hunter still is looking at 1 in 2000 odds every year and the max guy is still looking at around 1 in a 170ish odds, year in, year out.
But here's the kicker. Since the system has been in place for 11 yrs, the max guy right now gets 1 in 175 odds with 11 points. 11 yrs from now, the guy who's just getting in now has the same 11 points that the guy who was fortunate enough enter the draw when it was instituted year 1. But the new guy is still dealing with 1 in 2000 ish odds with 11 points and the max point guy still has better odds. 10 years later, it's the same situation. When the guy who had max points at 21 points still had FAR BETTER odds than the newer guy who now has 21 points and has the exact same odds as the guy who just entered with 1 point since they're all in the random pool.
Well, if you've put in for longer, then you should have better odds right? Sure. But every year forever until you die? That large of a disparity over people who have one point less than you?
The system was put in place 11 yrs ago, so people who are starting to put in now will always have lousy odds till the max point guys die, since there's not enough tags to take enough of them out of the PP pool to make your PP points worth a damn. Guys right now, are enjoying better odds and winning tags with 11 points and that will never ever happen again. Next year, someone with 12 points will win tags and that will never ever happen again.
The end result of this after the system has been in place for decades, is a system that allows only people in their 60s, 70s, and 80s to eventually win PP tags, all the while rewarding only the people who put in year 1 (until they all die or become too old to hunt). The more the demand for the tag, the more likely that even if you put in starting year 2, that you'll end up a very old man before you have a shot at a PP tag (and more reasonable odds).
Eventually, as people put their kids into the system, only the very oldest of hunters get a shot at the PP tags. If you start hunting at the age of 30, you can forget about getting a shot at a PP tag.
The system is broken and non-sustainable.
I've said it a million times and I'll say it again: PP systems have no place in high demand tag draws.
A BP system is the only way to go because, when the demand greatly outstrips the supply, then there simply isn't enough tags to go around and some people have to go without. The going without should include people from every year of system entrance and should not favor only the people who put in the year that the system was instituted. The BP system, even when BPs are squared, still rewards longevity, but in the long run, it gives everyone a chance at a tag and gives everyone a chance to increase their odds of a tag the longer they put in instead of only the first year apps having the better odds forever at the expense of newer hunters.
OIL tags ensure that newcomers don't get 2 tags while the old guy gets zero and are, IMO, an essential part of a BP system for high demand tags.
When tags are more plentiful, PP systems work and are nice because you can kinda plan when you're going to get your tag. But if it's going to take 20 or more years to climb into the PP round, the system is broken by using PPs instead of BPs.
Do you think the state game departments would have more trouble getting people to pay as much for the "bonus" points as for the "preference" points? This might be a concern for them with $$$ on the mind. A lot of less-than-savvy folks are wasting a lot of money on preference points right now though.
The current situation was foreseeable. No change will fix the supply/demand issue. But I foresee some changes as to who gets access to the supply changing. It will be unfair to folks that played by the rules and waited, but brought about the the sense that all those with fewer points aren't getting a fair shake now.
We have a sheep and goat system that handles high demand/low supply about as good as any and I imagine that will be a model for other high demand tags.
Unfortunately, folks want changes because they want tags but theres no real fix for that. Some changes can help the odds for some, but only at the expense of others. You can only cut a pie into so many pieces and the pie isn't getting any bigger. The line of folks waiting for a piece gets bigger all the time.
I like the idea of random draws most, with straight up bonus points (not squared) coming in a close second.
As far as bonus points not being as potentially lucrative, sure, maybe year 1. Yeah, year 1, you have a lot of reasons to get in the game because you'll have an edge forever.
But year 2 and beyond, you have more and more incentive to choose a BP system over a PP system because you still have a shot.
NM is really the only last true hold out to a pointless system (yeah, there's KY and some whitetail states), so the rules to the game are set unless they're fixed/tweaked.
In my case, there are some PP systems that I will not enter since I only jumped into the point game when I was 32. At that point, if my only shot is when I'm 80+ in a PP system, then I'm not going to enter the race, so they're losing my money and I think there's going to be more and more people who think like me the longer these systems stay in place as the point creep goes out farther and farther.
However, if I have at least a chance now or in a few years, then I can weigh the odds vs the money vs the quality of the tag.
Look at Nevada - the odds are horrid, but even with 5 points, you've got 26 raffle tickets going into that hat. Off the top of my head, I think 2 years ago or so, someone with 3 points won a 111 elk tag (might have been a different year or tag, but you get the idea).
So you're saying there's a chance...
If you changed the PP system to a BP system with squared points or even squared points just for the top 10% of point holders, they'd still have a huge advantage over everyone else.
No, they won't be guaranteed a tag, but I've already pointed out that when demand outstrips supply, you can't guarantee everyone a tag so righting this wrong would only be to fix a mistake that was made in the past.
Ya know, a lot of these folks will be eligible for Social Security at the age of 65. For someone born in 1978 like me, that minimum age has already been raised. It's already in the books. Is that fair? No. Is my generation kinda getting screwed? Yes. But did it have to be done to fix a broken system? Yes. (EDIT: And the fix was largely made by the max point crowd).
Some notable tags I skip are WY sheep/goat, OR elk, WA elk, and I'm not sure I'll continue applying for WY moose. I have in the past skipped CO elk, but I'm going to build a few points and then stop just to have the option open to draw a low point unit, if I so choose in the future, as I'm under no illusion that I have a shot at 61 before the age of 65 under the current system.
Doesn't matter if you get a buck/bull tag as a 1st choice, 2nd, leftover, voucher etc... you loose your points. I guarantee there will NEVER be point creep for resident tags then. Look at Utah with Two different point pools now, what a SCAM! yet they all complain they can't draw tags, yet still won't allow the system to be changed.
Completely different than the $crew the non-ressy point debate....
Good luck, Robb
Why not just a pure lottory system where all applicants have the same odds every time?
Yes Robb, but the point I was making applies to Resident and NR systems. For instance, my Cali example - I'm a CA resident and I'll probably never have a chance at a sheep tag in my home state because of a PP system where there ought to be a BP system.
Now, my odds would still be bad here at home with a BP system, but they'd be far better than they are now.
I agree, NRs are getting gouged on point prices, but I can stomach that price if I have a "snowball's chance," as Brotsky says.
Sarge, the only good reason for a point system is to try and spread out the tags so that some lucky dog doesn't win a ton of great tags like what still happens in NM. The problem is, they don't get spread out, they just get diverted to the people that entered the race first.
While I agree with some of your comments, that one is misleading. It's more a matter of getting in line first, not an unfair advantage in a race.
Even with the current system point creep wouldn't be quite so bad with a few adjustments. Like if you had to actually apply for a unit instead of a just a point. And if you drew, and turned the tag back in without a good reason, natural disaster, verified health issue, etc, (conflicting hunts, can't get the time off, etc., wouldn't qualify), you lost your points.
What's the difference?
For anyone getting into any of these races now, they have no chance of having a reasonable odds draw.
My California example was not far off the truth, there were 2 zones with 2K apps, one had 600 max pp folks, one had 550. These units have 2-3 PP tags per year so as long as the max people keep applying, they will continue to have the 1 in 200ish odds while the rest of us have one in 2000 odds and that won't change till they die because it would take 200 years to give them all a tag and go to the next point down.
These were actual apps for actual zones, not PPs only. Yes, your solution would help, but not that much. Actual apps to CA sheep were in excess of just the preference point apps by almost 10,000 applications.
Thus, I disagree. It is an unfair advantage in the race. Some people will have 1 in 200 odds their entire lives and everyone else will have 1 in 2000 odds their entire life until the former all die, so you can maybe pray for a tag when you're 80+ if you did not enter the year the system was instituted.
In 2002, I was not a hunter, so I don't have that life-long advantage.
That's only true if you're young when it's instituted (lots of chances over the years), or late to the game (little time to accrue points, so enjoy equal odds). The fact is that no system is "fair", nor is life.
IdyllwildArcher is upset because he got in line or "started the race" late. Why should he have the same odds as someone who has been in the game for years?
In Colorado, we have all three systems depending on species. Pure PP, BP after accumulating 3 PP (virtually the same thing as a pure BP system) and pure lottery. The only hunt I haven't been able to draw is the pure lottery. If it was either of the others, I would have been in at inception, and my odds would be much better. Certainly way better than the guy who just decided to try. Doesn't seem very "fair" to me.
It is also quite different to institute a new system, than to change one already in use.
That's only true PER DRAWING. You have much better odds of drawing a tag EVENTUALLY if you start young, just like with a PP system.
Very few other limited supply commodities are distributed by lottery. If you want a seat in a theater, or to purchase the newest electronic gadget, better get in line early, or wait 'til later to partake.
It's also a fallacy that young hunters just starting will never draw with a PP system. Eventually everyone ahead of them gets out of the draw. The trick is to just outlive them. ;-)
Some believe that everyone should have the same chance at tags. It's similar to someone standing in a line for hours and hours..and suddenly someone cuts in front of the line. Do you think the cutter is going to get some nasty looks! It would be similar to someone drawing a tag their first year of applying when others have applied 20+ years without drawing a tag.
Another scenerio would be like pulling a name out of the hat...with everyone that waited hours and hours in line... and those that just arrived having the same chance of having their name pulled out of the hat. I guess I'll leave it up to you what is fair!
That's not true. I am not advocating for a lottery system like NM. If you really read my post(s), my whole point is fixing a broken system. In any BP system, the new guy does not have "the same odds" as anyone else, but he actually has a shot the longer he stays in as opposed to a PP system where he has no chance (I'm calling 1 in 2000 no chance and in CO, you actually have no chance as there's no random pool for elk) till he's very old, almost irrespective of when he enters the race so long as he misses year 1.
And even where it's not fever-pitch now, another 20 years and it's going to be even worse. These systems haven't been around long enough to see the full effect. New guys seeing point holders in the 30 and 40 point range are going to be disillusioned if you tell them they have to wait that long for a tag. Plus, it's just stupid to only have a shot if you wait till you're old. That's like waiting to have your first girlfriend till you're 70 - you missed something there, son.
Think about it, there's people in Nevada that have 17 points for elk. That's 290 tickets in the hat as opposed to someone with no points who has one ticket in the hat or someone with one point who has 2 tickets in the hat. Again, after 5 yrs, you have 26 tickets in the hat - now you're starting to actually get somewhere with your investment, but the new comers are no where near the 290 tickets that the guy with 17 yrs who's done his time, has.
I'm not asking for the "same odds." Just some odds, something other than zero.
And saying "Life is not fair" is a non sequitur. Don't tell me you don't believe in justice, or fairness. Just because "life isn't fair," doesn't mean we don't try to make things right, better, or as close to ideal as possible. If a cop pulled you over and gave you a ticket even though you weren't speeding, would you be fine with it if he said, "life isn't fair?" Of course not. If Obama doubled your tax rate and said "life isn't fair," would you willingly go along with that without a fuss? Of course not.
Ziek, I'm curious what your standing is for points in CO and WY?
I was waiting for the "Life's not fair" line. The only one that hasn't surfaced yet is the "Obama voter" line or the "Communist" line. No one?
I know several guys who only hunt one day. I don't know anyone that I haven't met on Bowsite that hunts more than 50 days a year like I do. We're all on this website because even 50 days a year isn't enough and we have to read about it every single day that we're not doing it.
Who wants to hunt one day? Everyone. Who wants to hunt for longer? Far less of us.
Hunting one day would be just fine with a lot of hunters. It'd also destroy the truly special limited entry elk units and would decimate the sheep, goat, bison, and Shiras moose populations. There's not enough of them to go around.
I appreciate that you want to find novel ways to fix the problem, but your idea would not work.
I think a fair compromise would be to do as follows where states currently employ the PP system and the demand far outweighs the supply:
Take everyone's PPs and change them to bonus points using a factor of 2. 5 PP currently would equal 10 bonus points. All bonus points going forward could only be bought at a 1-per-year rate. For the first few years square everyone's bonus points in the draw. This would give the guys who have waited in line and have near max. a pretty fair shake.
If the state wanted to employ a squared bonus point system going forward, then cube the bonus points for the first few years. There would still be some guys with/near max that wouldn't draw in the first few years, but at least they would still be in.
I think some just don't understand that there are some draws where people who start applying really have no chance at drawing a tag in their entire life, even if they are very young. Either that or they are just greedy.
Honestly I'm probably never going to dive much into this primo tag game, but I sincerely think its a problem that can be fixed. I am debating on getting in on WY moose though because I would like the chance at a lower 48 shiras moose. It ticks me off that they force you to buy the PP, but you just have to decide is it worth donating the money every year to get in the small random pool. In all likelihood I'll never draw the tag via PP, unless system modification happens. It probably will, but who knows when.
I agree. I hate PP systems or BP systems. No one should have an advantage over anyone else. The only thing I could agree with is possibly if you draw a special tag you have to wait 1 or 2 years before you can put in again.
This year I paid over $200 to apply in Nevada. In Wyo it costs from $30 to $100/year/species just to apply for nonres pref pts ($30 for antelope up to $100 for sheep). If you calculate how much it costs over 20 years to apply it is an investment of both time and $. 20 x $200/year in NV is $4,000 over 20 years...that's just 1 state! Should those that apply for 20 years have a little better chance to draw tags than those just starting out..heck yes!
Why? Because they spent some money?
Should those that play Powerball every week, for all the years it's been around have some sort of preference too?
Why not just pay yuor F&G department to "fix" the draw so you get drawn? Same idea, but what they do now just takes longer and attracts more suckers.
When Powerball starts offering preference/bonus points, I'll support points for hunting draws.
It would seem what you really want is special treatment based on how much money you're willing pump into a rigged game. That's down right UN-American. :0)
I agree. But a BP system still rewards putting your time in.
My example above of NV shows what is, IMO, a fair system.
My example above of CA shows what is, IMO, not a fair system. The difference of someone who's applied for 12 years (1 in 200 odds) with someone who's applied for 10 years (1 in 2000 odds), and then the same odds for decades, is not fair.
You're right, changing from a PP system to a lottery system screws the people who've put the money in. Changing from a PP system to a BP system, maybe even with a bone thrown to people with PPs, IMO, is the most fair way to fix a broken system.
Sarge, applying for tags is not only an investment of $ but also time. I have a feeling you don't apply in many states other than your home state of Idaho where there is no point system? How many states did you apply for tags in 2014?
I pretty much pulled out of all big game draws in New Mexico and Idaho because they have no pref/bonus pt system. In Idaho nonres have to purchase a $154 hunting license just to apply. It seems like a no brainer not to apply in a states like Idaho and NM that charge so much to apply with horrible draw odds for high demand tags and no pref/bonus pt system that allows applicants to have greater draw odds the more years they apply?
Or, maybe I'm just biased because I drew a great Gila tag this year which was my first time applying there.
My current CO PP: Pronghorn - 4, Moose - 2 (already killed a CO bull), Mt. Goat - 3 + 4 (again already killed one), Sheep - 3 + 3 (already killed one and just keeping it 'alive' while applying for desert), Elk - 4 (have hunted unit 2 twice. 2nd time on hybrid draw), Deer - 0 (I hunt low draw units).
WY points: 0 Why would I pay non-res. fees when we have all the same species in CO?
Your original calculations don't add up either. You didn't take attrition into account. Us "baby boomers" are about to start dropping like flies. Already many of my friends are cutting way back on the types of hunts they can do. Some others may just get frustrated. Too bad for them. Giving up is never a good strategy if you really want something.
The point is the best system is different for everyone. PP are best if you believe in first come first served. Strict lottery if you're late to the game. BP if you're looking for some middle ground. It should also be stressed we are NOT talking about being locked out of hunting opportunity. Only premium units.
"When Powerball starts offering preference/bonus points, I'll support points for hunting draws."
They already do. You can buy as many chances (BP) as you want. When I can buy as many hunting points as my checkbook allows, that will be a fair comparison.
NoWiser, You are probably right about NM being a reasonbly priced state to apply. NM draw odds are horrible plus I've pulled the plug because I don't support what the NMG&F has done to DIY nonres hunters.
Residents have to buy a license to apply also. It's the law. Only licensed hunters may apply. If you buy one and don't get the draw you want,come hunt one of the hundreds of OTC hunts. No? Your choice, again.
And comparing hunt draws to Powerball is exactly the point. We're not talking about Powerball odds vs hunt draw odds here. It's about each applicant having the SAME odds ... no matter what those odds are. Pure lottery where NO ONE has preference. And I stand by my comment that your money does not entitle you to special treatment. It was your choice and remains so.
And you're right about applying only in Idaho. Because I oppose points systems and we here in Idaho do not want them. I will not apply in states that play that game. (But that's not the only reason. Idaho has all I need.) Points systems unfairly favor certain people over others for no other reason than those favored people spent some money on previous chances. You said it yourself.
How many Points in How many states do you have and you are still waiting to draw a tag--any species---
Good luck, Robb
PS-I didn't want to bring up how much $$ we have spent on those un-drawn tags with point$ option$...
I've drawn one WY general tag. Nothing in my home state (although I swing for the fence at home.)
Out of state hunters are stuck applying for expensive, high demand tags. If your only option was to apply in other states I know your opinion would be completely different about pt systems and drawing quality limited tags in other states...especially if you forked out thousands of dollars every year to apply.
Just like Sarge I'm sure Wyo res aren't too terribly exciting about any pt system because they currently have so many options for hunting easy to draw or OTC tags every year. It's a totally different game for nonres!
I have been fortune to draw many tags since the WG&F offered pref pts. I currently have 0 elk pref pts (drew my 3rd quality elk tag in 9 years), 0 antelope pts (drew one of the top antelope units in Wyo this year), 5 deer pts (drew one of the top muley tags in Wyo 5 years ago), and drew one of the best moose units Wyo has to offer with 10 pts a few years ago. Most of these tags I likely would not have drawn in my lifetime without pref pts!
The cost is a different issue and a red herring when it comes to the system.
Still, at home, as a res, I really don't have a shot to draw a sheep because of the PP system, given the vast majority of the tags go to the now minority of applicants who applied year one.
The situation is the same, albeit not as bad for elk, PH, and some deer tags.
Again, this is as a resident.
Can someone please explain to me why it's fair that someone who is 10 years older than me has 1 in 200 odds for sheep their entire life till they die while I have 1 in 2000 odds till I'm potentially in my 70s or 80s and then, and only then, have my odds bump up to one in 200ish (possibly)?
That's not getting in line. Getting in line implies that you get a turn. If you're not guaranteed a turn, then everyone should get a chance.
The system creates better odds for year one and then everyone has no chance till they're really old. It's stupid (unless you got in year one, then it's fantastic!)
Again that's just inflammatory. No doubt, most of them will drop out of the draw decades before they die.
I'm not advocating for any particular system, except against pure lottery. Additional years applying should count considerably in your odds. A 20 year old applying for the first time should not have the same odds as a 50 year old who's been putting in for 30 years. And if you're young enough that 50 seems like over-the-hill and too long to wait, you really are too young to deserve it.
"...there are a lot of nonres hunters that aren't lucky enough to live in a Western US state."
That's another subject, but luck has NOTHING to do with it. I was born in CT, and knew well enough at an early age (18 to be exact) that my life was out west. There were many compromises and lost opportunities along the way to keep it that way. You got to know what's important to you, and if you made those decisions well, you can't complain about the results.
I agree with you there Ziek. That's why I like Nevada's system.
No they aren't. They can choose from a plethora of OTC tags just like anyone else.
"Unlike Idaho at least when you are required to buy a spendy nonres NV license your draw odds improve each year with bonus pts!"
In Idaho your odds are equal to everyone else in that years draw. How much more fair can you get? :0) And as I said, you're always welcome to come use that license you bought.
I have a lot of points for a lot of animals in a lot of states.
With bonus point systems I build and build and build until I have great odds and that is why I am a second tier tag kind of guy. Even with tons of points in bonus point states odds for the premier units (according to the "experts") are stiil incredibly poor and it is tough to plan.
My plan was further foiled in Utah this year when they took my almost top tier elk unit down from 2 nr tags down to one, putting my 15 points I have patiently been building so I had great odds to draw when I could PLAN the time to a poor odds random draw :-( Planning that included an already completed 10 day trip to scout the unit in mid September so I would not be going in cold.
I'll keep working with whatever system each state has though.
They are all my CHOICE. I CHOOSE what to put in for and what to hunt. I CHOOSE where to spend my money and I ask no special treatment or consideration for any of it.
People that think points are the cat's meow invariably feel they are owned something for their CHOICES. They are not.
I understand what Idyllwild is saying and I agree that a system for these high demand areas needs to be provided that lets every hunter gain a better advantage for each year they try for a unit. But the fact of the matter is that there are just too many hunters for some of these very high demand areas and low tag quota. Even in a perfect system where there are only 2-3 tags available per year, a new hunter has very little chance of ever getting a tag when there are thousands of hunters ahead of them all with bonus points.
I know that some day all my OTC tags areas are going to be draw tag areas and that makes me sad. But until that day comes, I will not be giving the fish and game any extra money for points of any kind.
