Changes you would like to see in the big game drawings

[HUNTINCOUPLE]

I'd like to see the draws changed back to the way they were when I was growing up. You could only apply for one hunt per species. And if you drew, there was a three year wait until you could apply again for that species. And do away with preference points. The system we have today is a scam to bring in money to the state. It doesn't help your draw odds in the long run.

 

[westside bull]

Trophyhunt maybe its been talked about already? how do you become a witness to drawing and do you get called the day of drawing or do you days in advance when drawing is?

[jstone]

If you don't submit your report by the end of January you don't get to put in for that year!!

[rackattack]

If you don't submit your report by the end of January you don't get to put in for that year!!

 

[Gringo31]

Id like to see permits changed to tags.... so if you draw successfully, your tag is good for that hunt. No general season. That wouod make people think more about what they apply for.

Best idea with a chance of passing yet.  State still gets the same amount of revenue (unless less people put in for tags because of it) 

[EyeTooth]

Hi trophyhunt,
Thanks for being willing to advocate for us during your “witness” time with the game department this year.
After reading this thread, I would say that I fall into the (old timer) category of wishing we could go back to the ways of old, days of old, simplicity in our drawing system. We’re well beyond that now.
What I would like to know is what qualifications does one need to be a witness? How does one become a witness? Is the witness program anything other than a formality that the state requires for the drawings to be considered “legal”.
If I were to be a witness, I would like to be able to bring with me the best computer guy that I could find to be able to look into the system and make sure that there isn’t a chance that some people would be favored in the drawings, and/or that others weren’t being blacklisted, or hindered in the drawings in any way. Other than eating doughnuts, drinking coffee and just being present during this drawing process, what professional qualities do you bring to the “witness” table? I’m definitely not saying that I’m qualified to be a witness, but I will say that if I were a witness, I would do anything in my power to prove to myself and everyone else that the drawings are legit. If I was there it may not be the most comfortable place for the “yes” men and women in the room, and if I found there to be any discrepancies at all in the system I wouldn't hesitate to let EVERYONE know.
Please don’t misunderstand or be insulted be my post. I’ve seen how some state business is conducted. You’ve already shown that you care about us by starting this thread. Thank you! These drawings are serious business for a lot of hunters, and we need a perfectly unbiased and very honest group of people to be conducting them. If you could just figure out how to really make sure that the drawings that we have are perfectly fair, your witness time would be very well spent!
Thanks again for being willing to help.

[pendoreilleadventures]

I would really like to see 50% of oil tags go to hunters with 10 points or more then the remainder are just random draw within the entire pool.

Also would like to see it similar to Idaho if you want a moose tag you cant put in for other oil tags. That would help cut down on applicants in some of the tags because they really want a ram instead of a moose but put in for both just because they can.

[Skillet]

If the solution isn't revenue neutral, it's D.O.A.  So only applying for one oil species will only work if you can still buy the point for the others.  It's the problem with the other reduction strategies. If they rely on reducing the apps you can purchase and apply for it will only work if they make up the revenue with increased app charges. Maybe that would be worth it to some but that is the only way it would work.

Wacenturion, I suspect that the cross over of doe/cow running parallel to buck/bull was more harm than the number of hunts you can apply for.   There were thousands of doe only hunters who had no reason to apply for buck who may as well now, nothing to lose. Can't get the genie back in that bottle because of the revenue.  If you go to one unit only per app, I think there'll be a shift of some pressure back to "easier" to draw units.  I think if Entiat/Sawkane/Pogue/Chiwawa etc become borderline OIL permits many will look to improve their odds elsewhere.  All the points out there exist so if you only disperse them rather than cut them out the pool all together, pressure simply shifts.

I have kids that apply for moose.  I don't think unlicensed youth should be able to buy points.  I'd be happy to see the net cost of all OIL permits go up by whatever the revenue loss is to youth point building before they are licensed hunters. It just seems obvious to me that kids with nothing invested and no time waited in line should not build equity, not on top of youth opportunity in these same species.

The math sucks. Tag #'s are fixed in relative terms.  The need for revenue starts at no loss from last year's number so either the costs go up and opportunity down or it's more of what we have now.

Can't find a thing to disagree with in here.  And I looked hard, 'cause I'm feeling pretty punchy today. 

I believe 100% the splitting of permits into categories and allowing applications into all of them destroyed the draw process.  It was sold to us as an "increase in opportunity" - but what was left out was the opportunity was not to actually hunt, but the opportunity to choose what to apply for.  It is a sham revenue generator that the WDFW should be ashamed of forcing on us. 

Both Bobcat and WACenturian are correct.  As per BC, there are so many people and so many tags.  It's the the Lottery mentality - "Somebody's gotta to win it!"  As per WACent, there are almost 4 times the applicants as used to be in his particular hunt, dramatically lowering his actual odds, but only for that hunt.  For WACent's overall odds of pulling a permit of any kind to get remotely closer to where they were before the big split (getting back to same odds can't happen because everybody's points got replicated throughout all categories of the same species), WACent has to apply for everything possible (deer, elk, OIL) and be happy with pulling whatever he can every 2-3 years instead of the one hunt he wanted every 2-3 years.  Spending all that money on all those applications is the opportunity we were actually given and makes Bobcat's statement closer to accurate. 
 

[mp.hunter]

Hi trophyhunt,
Thanks for being willing to advocate for us during your “witness” time with the game department this year.
After reading this thread, I would say that I fall into the (old timer) category of wishing we could go back to the ways of old, days of old, simplicity in our drawing system. We’re well beyond that now.
What I would like to know is what qualifications does one need to be a witness? How does one become a witness? Is the witness program anything other than a formality that the state requires for the drawings to be considered “legal”.
If I were to be a witness, I would like to be able to bring with me the best computer guy that I could find to be able to look into the system and make sure that there isn’t a chance that some people would be favored in the drawings, and/or that others weren’t being blacklisted, or hindered in the drawings in any way. Other than eating doughnuts, drinking coffee and just being present during this drawing process, what professional qualities do you bring to the “witness” table? I’m definitely not saying that I’m qualified to be a witness, but I will say that if I were a witness, I would do anything in my power to prove to myself and everyone else that the drawings are legit. If I was there it may not be the most comfortable place for the “yes” men and women in the room, and if I found there to be any discrepancies at all in the system I wouldn't hesitate to let EVERYONE know.
Please don’t misunderstand or be insulted be my post. I’ve seen how some state business is conducted. You’ve already shown that you care about us by starting this thread. Thank you! These drawings are serious business for a lot of hunters, and we need a perfectly unbiased and very honest group of people to be conducting them. If you could just figure out how to really make sure that the drawings that we have are perfectly fair, your witness time would be very well spent!
Thanks again for being willing to help.
[/quote

I was a witness last year. The game department does not do the draw themselves, outdoor central does. After the draw is done it gets sent back to WDFW and they then have to go through all the categories and make sure the points are moved to 0 for the winners. This process takes time. So you don't actually see the draw take place, however it is explained to the witnesses on how it is administered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobcat]

Very well said, Skillet. Especially this part:

I believe 100% the splitting of permits into categories and allowing applications into all of them destroyed the draw process.  It was sold to us as an "increase in opportunity" - but what was left out was the opportunity was not to actually hunt, but the opportunity to choose what to apply for.  It is a sham revenue generator that the WDFW should be ashamed of forcing on us.

If it were up to me, we would be dumping our system entirely and adopting Idaho's. No points!  Points are evil!

[Wacenturion]

Skillet.....your assumption probably is correct, except that I really don't care about having better odds overall for other draws that I'm not really interested in.

[bearpaw]

If the solution isn't revenue neutral, it's D.O.A.  So only applying for one oil species will only work if you can still buy the point for the others.  It's the problem with the other reduction strategies. If they rely on reducing the apps you can purchase and apply for it will only work if they make up the revenue with increased app charges. Maybe that would be worth it to some but that is the only way it would work.

Wacenturion, I suspect that the cross over of doe/cow running parallel to buck/bull was more harm than the number of hunts you can apply for.   There were thousands of doe only hunters who had no reason to apply for buck who may as well now, nothing to lose. Can't get the genie back in that bottle because of the revenue.  If you go to one unit only per app, I think there'll be a shift of some pressure back to "easier" to draw units.  I think if Entiat/Sawkane/Pogue/Chiwawa etc become borderline OIL permits many will look to improve their odds elsewhere.  All the points out there exist so if you only disperse them rather than cut them out the pool all together, pressure simply shifts.

I have kids that apply for moose.  I don't think unlicensed youth should be able to buy points.  I'd be happy to see the net cost of all OIL permits go up by whatever the revenue loss is to youth point building before they are licensed hunters. It just seems obvious to me that kids with nothing invested and no time waited in line should not build equity, not on top of youth opportunity in these same species.

The math sucks. Tag #'s are fixed in relative terms.  The need for revenue starts at no loss from last year's number so either the costs go up and opportunity down or it's more of what we have now.

Can't find a thing to disagree with in here.  And I looked hard, 'cause I'm feeling pretty punchy today. 

I believe 100% the splitting of permits into categories and allowing applications into all of them destroyed the draw process.  It was sold to us as an "increase in opportunity" - but what was left out was the opportunity was not to actually hunt, but the opportunity to choose what to apply for.  It is a sham revenue generator that the WDFW should be ashamed of forcing on us. 

Both Bobcat and WACenturian are correct.  As per BC, there are so many people and so many tags.  It's the the Lottery mentality - "Somebody's gotta to win it!"  As per WACent, there are almost 4 times the applicants as used to be in his particular hunt, dramatically lowering his actual odds, but only for that hunt.  For WACent's overall odds of pulling a permit of any kind to get remotely closer to where they were before the big split (getting back to same odds can't happen because everybody's points got replicated throughout all categories of the same species), WACent has to apply for everything possible (deer, elk, OIL) and be happy with pulling whatever he can every 2-3 years instead of the one hunt he wanted every 2-3 years.  Spending all that money on all those applications is the opportunity we were actually given and makes Bobcat's statement closer to accurate. 
 

There are only so many animals out there and currently everyone can apply for every category relatively cheaply, unless you are like me and apply for every category then it adds up anyway. If we want increased odds in each category then we will need to limit application choices which will lower the overall application numbers, but as Colville pointed out, to do that we would need to increase the cost so that WDFW is still funded at the same level with fewer applications.

The math has to work one way or another to support the WDFW budget! I would rather pay more so that hunters/fishers fully fund WDFW and so that our hunting/fishing opportunities should be the first priority after sustaining wildlife.

[bugs n bones]

Very well said, Skillet. Especially this part:

I believe 100% the splitting of permits into categories and allowing applications into all of them destroyed the draw process.  It was sold to us as an "increase in opportunity" - but what was left out was the opportunity was not to actually hunt, but the opportunity to choose what to apply for.  It is a sham revenue generator that the WDFW should be ashamed of forcing on us.

If it were up to me, we would be dumping our system entirely and adopting Idaho's. No points!  Points are evil!

:tup:I agree 100percent they sold us a bill of goods

[fishngamereaper]

I'd like to see the draws changed back to the way they were when I was growing up. You could only apply for one hunt per species. And if you drew, there was a three year wait until you could apply again for that species. And do away with preference points. The system we have today is a scam to bring in money to the state. It doesn't help your draw odds in the long run.

 

Pretty much agree. At least stop squaring the preference points and assigning random numbers. If you have 10 points throw the name into the hat ten times.

[Wacenturion]

Just for what it's worth I go way way back with the draw system.  In my first several years with the old Wa. Dept. of Game I would like others in different regions hit the road with my boss and meet up with other members of wildlife mgt. to hold drawings in Grand Coulee, Mansfield, Omak, Twisp, and E. Wenatchee to mention a few to hold drawings in August/Sept.  We would put all the mailed in cards for individual units into a big barrel, rotate it and draw out a card in front of the applicants that showed up.

Time consuming yes.  But PR wise it was wonderful.  Always had a few who didn't hear their name doubt whether or not their card was indeed included.  After an individual drawing if someone doubted the fairness of his or her card being in the barrel, we would quickly go through and find it.  Never once was someone's card not in the barrel, unless of course they didn't mail it in, which we never ran into.

Saw the same local folks every year and some who traveled to witness the draw since they too put in for a specific area.  All kinds of gimmicks...heavy tape on edges to help define someone's card and hopefully have the person drawing pull it out.

Life was better back then.....three times as many hunters, far more opportunity, and no gleaning for dollars by D.O.G (Dept. of Game).  So if I seem somewhat dismayed or disgusted at the current way of doing things, it's because I'm coming from a far different perspective than most of you.