The Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce's recommendation involves three primary changes:
1) Transition from a prescriptive draw where 75% of licenses are drawn from the top point holders to a system that is completely random.
2) Transition to a weighted bonus point system where an applicant’s advantage in the draw increases exponentially with each subsequent year they continue to apply. The Taskforce recommends this be implemented by squaring an applicant’s total number of bonus points.
3) Delay implementation by up to four years from the date the law is effective to provide long term applicants with the highest numbers of preference points a transition period.
Why is this an issue?
The Taskforce heard from many hunters that there is no way they will ever draw a moose or sheep license under the Wyoming current system, and there is frustration that the current system may not be effective anymore. The Taskforce’s recommendation is meant to alleviate some of the issues with the current system and help people draw licenses.
The Wyoming Game and Fish Departments wants to hear your thoughts to bring to the discussion at the legislature.
Any changes would still need to work through a legislative process that includes multiple opportunities for public involvement.
Wyoming does not care if the draw is fair to everyone. All they are trying to do is recuperate all of the preference point fees that they will be losing by people dropping out of the race.
I got the survey also. I see this change proposal is for both NR and RES draws. But the issue for NR applicants is that the chance to draw moose or sheep has now ended for most of us, under the current draw algorithm, with the legislature's implementation of 90/10. Only the top couple or three point classes now have a genuine possibility to draw, as preference. Because the 90/10 rule eliminates, mathematically, all of the random draw tags (except possibly one Moose tag statewide left in the random). There would be no sense applying or buying points (at 150.00 each) any longer for most NR, except for those who are in the top few point tiers. Points sales for those two species alone could represent 3.5 million dollars in out-of-state revenue annually, since there are currently 11,700 NR's holding sheep points and 11,300 NR's holding moose points. I'm sure they don't want to lose a large portion of that potential revenue.FWIW, my preference is not one of their listed options. But it would be to keep some of the tags in the preference draw. IMO they should consider, say a 50-50 split, preference to random. Go ahead and square points for the random portion if they want. Or even cube them, if the hope is to give any real advantage to the higher point holders. Even still, the advantage for the upper point classes in the random draw will continue to be heavily diluted by the massive influx of new applicants flocking to the draws.
They said: “The Taskforce heard from many hunters that there is no way they will ever draw a moose or sheep license under the Wyoming current system”
I guess it took a bunch of us uneducated redneck hicks like me to explain that to them!?!? I ain’t real smart but I knew that 20 years ago….
I don’t don’t see squaring the points to be much better, everyone’s get squared, so what’s the real difference? Not like Nevada is doing a whole lot better at this point.
I certainly don’t have any answers, but i think it’s a joke if anyone says they do, it’s clear that everyone has their own agenda. The state has gotta make $, point holders want to cling to the Ponzi scheme they invested in, low point holders want to hunt, residents don’t want NR’s to hunt. I’m sure there are 12 other groups I’m forgetting. But none want the same thing.
The point systems across the west are all a mess. Not sure what the answer is with the limited supply and ever increasing demand.
Strange that applications keep going up when we keep getting told that hunter numbers are decreasing.
Never would have dreamed 30 years ago that I would have apologies all these years and still not drawn in so many states. And, in most of them, it seems like my odds go down every year instead of increasing with increasing points. Sucks!
Back in the day, one of few application restrictions was waiting 5 years before applying again after drawing a tag. I have had talked to guys that drew tags the next time they were eligible multiple after wait times They both shot multiple sheep and moose. Al the good ole days!
Then came information age and the masses jumped in and overloaded the system and resource.
The squaring and multiply points is just an emotional numbers ruse.
With so few tags and the thousands and thousands of applicants, all the hybrid scenarios will only keep a very very few top point holders happy.
Time to clean the slate and go pure random for everyone everywhere. Best I can do is charge the the high point holders far less than the newbie. A sliding scale app fee from $200 for newbie ( yes another increase) to $1 app fee for top point holder(s).
This from someone who has 20 plus points in multiple states.
"The Taskforce heard from many hunters that there is no way they will ever draw a moose or sheep license under the Wyoming current system"
It does not matter how you do the draw many hunters are never going to draw a lot of tags when there are few tags and 10's of thousands that want them. Just be thankfully if you get to be one of the lucky few.
Sure, but people want to have at least a chance and people will pay some money for even bad odds. Thing is, people won't pay a ton of money (WY is too expensive for moose/sheep points) for horrid odds.
At least in NV, your $150 gets you in for several species for only a few more bucks for each app and you definitely can draw a decent deer and PH tag even though the odds for elk and sheep are bad.
WY, you're in for that much for each specie so it's easy to decide which ones are not worth the coin and apply accordingly.
I don't understand why there's "no chance"? If it's point based, sure you need years, 20 of them for some just starting, to "get in the game", but after that there's a chance, just a small one. No scheme will change that.
I'd be in favor of total random draw, but that rips off the people with years invested in points. The double/square/whatever to scale points won't solve anything UNLESS you go to a random draw and scale for a short time to make up for essentially taking points away. The problem being there's to many people applying.
The only "fair" solution, given that there are way more people than tags, is to raise the price to drop the pool of applicants, but then that's introducing a sort of "class warfare" in which is also wrong.
It's not much better for us residents for moose/sheep, they are close to once in a lifetime for many
I don't understand why there's "no chance"?Mathematics. They cut the NR allocation to a maximum of 10% of the permits. And since 3/4 of the permits by unit are awarded by preference, and 1/4 by random draw, this mathematically eliminated all the sheep hunts from the random draw for NR's. Because there'd now have to be 40 tags in a unit to allow a random tag for NR's. And no unit gives out that many.As far as why you might never expect to have a chance in the preference draw, without currently holding 20 points or more, a quick glance at the point tables answers that question. With a maximum of 18 permits now going to NR's each year at current quotas, you can see that the top few tiers of points will take decades to clear out. There were more than 1000 NR's holding 20 or more sheep points prior to this year's draw. No way I'm spending 150.00 per year plus app fees, with zero chance to draw, only on the hope that 30-40 years from now, and not before, I might start to have a slim chance to draw. This is last year's chart.
The only solution that all hunters will agree with is a way to increase big game populations. That however may come in conflict with a host of other hot button issues for everyone and be costly-
Here are some ways to increase big game numbers-
Habitat improvements: Many things like native plant restoration, prescribed burning, logging, closing off access to areas, etc
Restrict or close developments (residential, commercial etc) especially on winter range, birthing ranges,
Restrict/close oil and gas developments, roads into areas
Highway over/under passes and fencing
Build more water options especially in desert areas
Supplemental feeding especially in wintering areas
Predator control
Open closed lands (National Parks, etc) to hunting
Possible breeding programs? Genetic modification for disease resistance, drought tolerance? * more controversial ways to help game-
Zbone— you were fxxked regardless with 21 points. You were pretty much always only hoping for a random assuming the units you applied even had randoms. Those points were never gonna get you there.
Actually there were units when he had say 16-18 points or less he could have drawn. In effect he could have drawn first 18 years of applying 100% The last 4-5 years has been a shift to draw any unit no matter the trophy potential. I believe all these consulting business started spreading their applicants across all units. Causing rapid point creep across the board.
The guy with 22 points could have drawn in 2001 with zero points because a buddy did. Why in 2000 the unit I drew had 6 NR tags available and only 5 applicants. That year 25 residents received tags instead of usual 24.
Actually there were units when he had say 16-18 points or less he could have drawn. In effect he could have drawn first 18 years of applying 100% The last 4-5 years has been a shift to draw any unit no matter the trophy potential. I believe all these consulting business started spreading their applicants across all units. Causing rapid point creep across the board.
The guy with 22 points could have drawn in 2001 with zero points because a buddy did. Why in 2000 the unit I drew had 6 NR tags available and only 5 applicants. That year 25 residents received tags instead of usual 24.
There are no good solutions that I am aware of. I have 23 points for both species. I guess that I was a patsy for investing and applying all of these years. I am a life member of WSF and RMEF. I live on the east coast where there are no sheep, but I contribute to putting sheep on the mountain. I am old and will continue to do so regardless of what these western states do. I am concerned though about the ability of these conservation organizations to continue to attract new members and investments from the east coast when there is no reasonable chance that non- residents will be able to hunt sheep. I am sure that many residents are ok with this, but they will need to shoulder all of the expenses as the non-resident money that helped to fund these programs will dry up.
I submitted the survey. Kind of a joke really, they have decided what they are going to do. As someone with 22 points WY was the one place I thought I had a chance over the years. Having considered every B grade unit however when I talked to people and told them. That I don't own a hunting rifle or shoot them they all pushed me back to the mainstay units.
Unfortunately the G&F departments have become addicted to the draw dollars. I don't think it was that way 20 years ago. Their concern today is number of applicants period. And how they can keep as many a possible sending the checks.
The good news is that hunting was my vice growing up and I never fell for the hard drugs because I had somewhere to be when the sun came up the next day. OHHHH NOW I GET IT. G&F was my dealer..........
Michigan's version of an elk draw. Take it for what it's worth.....
Elk Drawing System
Elk licenses are awarded to hunters using a random weighted drawing system which began in 2003. Each year, unsuccessful applicants receive one additional "chance" for future drawings.
In the 2021 drawing, applicants had up to 19 chances to be selected - once chance for their current-year application, plus up to 18 chances earned in previous elk drawings (2003 - 2020).
Elk License Drawing
All license applicants (those who specified "Bull Only" or "Bull or Antlerless" on their application) are eligible for an Any-Elk license. The Any-Elk license is valid for a bull elk or an antlerless elk. Those who specified "Bull or Antlerless" are eligible for an Antlerless Elk license if not selected in the Any-Elk license drawing.
For more information, refer to the Michigan Elk Digest.
Total applicants: 49,117 (7,396 applied for chance-only)
I hear you Nate. I suspect that non-resident applications in these western states are going to decline - reducing revenue to the G&F Departments. I have a son who is 28 years old and loves to hunt and support conservation. I started to get him points in some of the western states many years ago. He has looked at the non-resident odds and is wondering whether to continue to throw more money to these states when his chances of drawing are next to none. His hunting friends are of the same mindset and do not apply.
They will absolutely have to change the way the draw works. I don't know any state where you're given the option to apply and pay a fee for a point, without a lifetime chance to draw a permit for that species. I may not be illegal, but would be a highly questionable practice IMO. And it's a safe assumption that the NR participation rate (read: money flow) would drop significantly.So they have to change the system. Someone must've put a bug in their ear that squaring points is wonderful. IMO....it is not that great. It was a decent system at one time, where it is used, but increasingly-larger waves of new applicants year after year has changed that. The systems in Nevada and Montana today illustrate what it morphs into. Everyone's points are squared, so as the years pass, the thing gets more and more bottom-heavy, resulting in more and more tags going to the lower to middle point classes, simply because as a group, they are overwhelmingly bigger in size. The advantage of holding max and near max points in those systems has diminished dramatically.
Another 23 point NR getting screwed here. Also a life member in many conservation organizations. Wyoming was my last hope for a Rocky hunt that I could eventually count on. So depressing.
While answering the survey I was trying to think of a more fair way to transition out of preference. There isn’t a good way, but what if they offered to allow you to allocate your points to elk/deer/antelope to be split however you want. I would consider dropping my 19 points into those pools- maybe others would as well? Or what if they split the allocated tags into a preference and bonus system with a 10 year sunset on preference points. Then allow anyone with preference points after the sunset period to transfer them to the bonus point pool. Or a combination. At least point holders would have a choice to determine their future. The proposed method they are proposing really doesn’t feel as if you have any choice except to take it in the a$$ or drop out.
All of these preference point systems where demand greatly outweighs supply are going to be changed eventually because they're not sustainable. Many of these draws you would need to eventually have 100 year olds drawing all the tags. It's ridiculous to only have people that old drawing all the tags.
The only way that the G&F Depts can save a little bit of face is to transform the PPs into BPs. There's just no way to give everyone a hunt.
So the way I read it, if they implement the 4 year delay, the guys with max points down to about 23-24 points can draw, IF they apply each year until the change is put in place, and IF they apply in opposite units from each other. We know that won’t happen, but if it did, the top point holders would be cleared and had a chance to draw. After the 4 years, the rest of us are pretty much screwed, except for the 18 random guys every year, no matter how many bonus/preference points one has.( I’m looking at nr only) The residents gained 18 tags per species, and virtually no increased chance to draw, with virtually no increase in revenue. They sure don’t seem to care about the money generated and lost by these changes, and have to know that whatever they decide they will lose a substantial sum every year. I’m not sure what the real agenda is here, since many will drop out all together.
Anyone who understands math, statistics and how the draw worked for 25 years understand under the old system you WOULD draw sheep tag if you put in long enough. Math showed me when I started I would draw in about 25 years, top end unit. There was a guy on MM that posted stuff every year taking latest numbers and it confirmed it.
I graduated college in 1999 the same year they went to $7 points, coincidence. Had I started 1 year sooner I would have drawn in 20 years.
Bottom line is about 3% of apps drop out each year. That actually gets you to the top far faster then those who draw. People do not understand that.
I got lucky and drew this year with 22 points. Had I not and kept trying I would have definitely drawn if nothing changed, in at most 25 year. Unit 5 sheep.
Under the new system the old "sure draw" in 25 years is gone.
If you disagree look around. Anywhere as a NR today 25 points will get you basically over 99% of draw tags in the Rocky Mountains with preference point tags. Anything you would not have would be because of a change DURING your time Appling. Like CO going from 35% of elk tags for NR to 20%.
I, and several others, predicted exactly this over the past year. There was no doubt it was coming. After all everyone else is doing it............. so all the lemmings think it is ok.
I'm a resident and I still don't have a chance at a top unit. The bonus point idea is just as dumb as the current system. With the lack of tags available it has quite literally become a lottery.
There was no sure draw of 25 years. Not for sheep nor moose in MT as a non-resident.
The guys blessed with year of birth and finances got started when there was not 25 years of guys ahead of them in the points game. The 25 years is an illusion that soon would have become 30 then 35 then 40 then 50 for a sure thing if you have a kid eligible to start applying last year. Anytime the number of guys ahead of you falls by more guys dying or become incapacitated than the guys that draw a tag then the very, very bad math of any non-random big game draw is exposed if the tags awarded is not more than 10% of applicants.
All that is done when a preference point system is launched is to create a non-deserving class of hunters priority that is greatly exaggerated than the hunters that begin applying even 5 years later. The Max Pool guys get 75% of the tags while the Max-5 point guys saddle up for 25 years or more to get in the 75% game.
Bonus points, even if not squared, are problematic.
With a random draw you have the same odds each year no matter how long you have been applying but you had all those bites of the apple to get a tag when the newbie is just getting the first bite.
How to get out of this preference point mess and still allow F&G to feed on the tit of non-resident hunters? Cap points at 10. You get 10 years to build your odds over a newbie and 10 bites at the apple. After 10, you are maxed but your application fee is what a point/application totals today. If you have more than 10 points today then you get up to three bites at the apple each draw season for that species as your points are reduced by 3 until you are back at 10 points.
I feel dirty just typing that. You know and I know F&G will not allow revenues to fall and residents always think they pay too much now in fees. Joe Sixpack long ago was getting the shaft as elk tags started to jump over $1000 much less the path for sheep, goat, moose and bison that make recent inflation at the fuel pump since tame.
I was only referring to states with preference points that were started 25 years ago or more. Statistically speaking roughly two or three percent of people give up or drop out of a draw each year. In a preference point system any new applicants are below you so are irrelevant. Even with zero tags available that puts you at the top in about 25 or 30 years. Factor in a chance that you will draw sooner and that in many preference Point draws half the applicants don't even apply for a tag each year.
