Idea to fix WA elk hunting.

[bobcat]

A preference point system is a good idea for states that don't have any over the counter tags. For us, I think our random draw bonus point system is working just fine. You don't need to draw a special permit in order to hunt. Any change that would favor high point holders over new hunters is 100% opposite of the direction we need to go, IMO. Don't give new hunters even less reason to becoming involved in hunting.

[Rainier10]

I bet there are 35 plus states that would love to have the OTC elk opportunity that we have here.  What are there 9-12 states in the country that have OTC elk hunting for residents?

[Jpmiller]

Maybe I'm delusional but I think Washington elk hunting is s pretty good deal. I have a shot every year of drawing s really good bull tag and if I don't draw I can still hunt. I can go after some prime units with tons of public lands on the Eastside and Chase spikes if I don't draw or play it safer on the westside and if I don't draw still hunt bulls.

We don't and probably can't have elk herds like the Rocky mountain states because we don't have the same habitat and winter range as they do.

Elk hunting is not a sure thing and no matter how limited entry you make it drawing a tag might give you a chance at less pressured elk but they still won't be running up to your truck bugling their heads off. Being a Washington resident doesn't make you entitled to an elk and buying a tag doesn't either.

Given the cards we have been dealt I think we have it pretty good. Sure it can be better but I really don't see how reducing hunting opportunities makes any sense. Has giving ground ever worked before?

[CarbonHunter]

Anyone ever thought of using a higher "multiplier" for points once a certain threshold is reached?

I realize it's not a way to "fix" any situation with elk. But it does seem like it might make sense to give people who have been putting in for special permits for years at least better odds of getting selected.

What I mean is all points are now squared. After say 10 years they could be cubed (or something like that). 

This was proposed the last time they tried to change the system in response to a convoluted mess that the state proposed in order to help people with high points draw tags.

Next year they are planning on making "major changes" as it will be the 3 year rule making session and there will not be any budgetary restrictions on state rule making.  I'm curious as to what they are planning as they had a pretty large reduction in permits this year and if they continue next year who knows what we will be left with. 

[idahohuntr]

Anyone ever thought of using a higher "multiplier" for points once a certain threshold is reached?

I realize it's not a way to "fix" any situation with elk. But it does seem like it might make sense to give people who have been putting in for special permits for years at least better odds of getting selected.

What I mean is all points are now squared. After say 10 years they could be cubed (or something like that). 

This was proposed the last time they tried to change the system in response to a convoluted mess that the state proposed in order to help people with high points draw tags.

Next year they are planning on making "major changes" as it will be the 3 year rule making session and there will not be any budgetary restrictions on state rule making.  I'm curious as to what they are planning as they had a pretty large reduction in permits this year and if they continue next year who knows what we will be left with.

The solution to Ponzi schemes is not to double down...but I can see the State doing just that to keep $ flowing 

[Roperfive88]

I believe one thing would help if they took for example a unit that has 15tags out of those 15tags give 10 to the applicant that has 15 or more points and the rest to the applicants that have less then 15. And once u draw one of those tags u have to wait like 2-5yrs before u can apply for said hunt again. U can still collect points, just can't apply for that unit until you've waited. There are a lot of applicants that draw those tags with 2-8 pts, and a guy like myself that has 20 can't seem to draw. Other states have a preference point system where u draw after you have a certain amount of points.  I realize it's a random draw, but this carrot the WDFW is holding out for the points isn't working. Just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They do that the new hunters will never make it to the top til they are too old to hunt. For example a unit I put in for has 14 tags and 1400 apply assuming no one leaves the pool unless they draw or joins after putting in for something else thats 100 years for a new hunter to draw. Lets say with people leaving the pool it takes 50 years to draw for a new hunter and they start applying at 8 they wont draw til 58 and 70 if you start at 20. People need to quit thinking about themselves and relize the math is what it is multipliers and preferences just make it harder for the mass and easier for the few. What happens when there are over 1000 peole with 15 points move it to 25 for those who still cant draw. If you multiply on one side of the equation (hunters) and don't on the other side (the elk) things are not going to be even. I have 15 pts and if the highest points got tags it would still take over 10 years to draw.

[King Krok]

I believe one thing would help if they took for example a unit that has 15tags out of those 15tags give 10 to the applicant that has 15 or more points and the rest to the applicants that have less then 15. And once u draw one of those tags u have to wait like 2-5yrs before u can apply for said hunt again. U can still collect points, just can't apply for that unit until you've waited. There are a lot of applicants that draw those tags with 2-8 pts, and a guy like myself that has 20 can't seem to draw. Other states have a preference point system where u draw after you have a certain amount of points.  I realize it's a random draw, but this carrot the WDFW is holding out for the points isn't working. Just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They do that the new hunters will never make it to the top til they are too old to hunt. For example a unit I put in for has 14 tags and 1400 apply assuming no one leaves the pool unless they draw or joins after putting in for something else thats 100 years for a new hunter to draw. Lets say with people leaving the pool it takes 50 years to draw for a new hunter and they start applying at 8 they wont draw til 58 and 70 if you start at 20. People need to quit thinking about themselves and relize the math is what it is multipliers and preferences just make it harder for the mass and easier for the few. What happens when there are over 1000 peole with 15 points move it to 25 for those who still cant draw. If you multiply on one side of the equation (hunters) and don't on the other side (the elk) things are not going to be even. I have 15 pts and if the highest points got tags it would still take over 10 years to draw.

Im already there, I'm 50 now and can't draw!!! But u are right about people with so many points they aren't drawing. I was just thinking if u cleared out some of the applicants that have a *censored* ton of points? If u look at the average now, I'm over the average by quite a few. I know a few people that have said this, but I'm to the point of taking my money elsewhere now. I've been at this game in this state for 40yrs and it's gotten worse every year. Just my 2cents, so take it for what it's worth. Everyone has an opinion and they're like *censored*s. Everyone has one and generally they stink.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[King Krok]

I don't see WA as having an issue with point creep... There is no units that took say 10 points last year that will take more than 10 this year.  Everyone has a chance, albeit slim, to draw any tag in the state. Guys every year are drawing quality tags with minimal points.  The only change I wouldn't mind seeing is a percentage of the special permits going to the highest point holder 25% maybe, But then we would have point creep I also like Idahos system much better, but WA is too invested in the point system to look back now IMO

I couldn't agree more with you. I kind of started the same thing. Some people are worried about the new hunters and trying to get them in, I get that. But that being said. It's like a job or career, u start at the bottom and work ur way up. U can't just start at the top?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobcat]

But everybody will not draw in a liftetime. It's impossible to make the system in such a way that everyone will eventually draw. They just won't. Too many applicants and not enough tags. It's like winning the lottery. Just being a loyal player and buying your tickets every week doesn't guarantee you'll win the jackpot eventually. You most likely never will. The fact that you've been buying lottery tickets for 20 years does not give you any better odds than the guy who bought his first ticket today. And it shouldn't.

[blackveltbowhunter]

 I agree with Bobcats assesment. Personally I would give up my points if they did away with the system. And went to a true lottery like idaho. At least for deer and elk.  And I am heavily invested. The biggest problem with points IMHO is it takes the incentive out of managing game to maximize revenue. If the tags in the st helens unit were still producing whopper bulls, like the Margaret and Toutle of 15 or 20 years ago. Then we would have less pressure on other herds around the state and less competition for coveted tags. But the game department has no incentive, because instead of having to work for your money by managing units to encourage applications and dollars, they "give" you a point. A "return" for your money. So as other units collapse it will simply shift pressure from applicant pools to those areas.

[Rainier10]

But everybody will not draw in a liftetime. It's impossible to make the system in such a way that everyone will eventually draw. They just won't. Too many applicants and not enough tags. It's like with the lottery. Just being a loyal player and buying your tickets every week doesn't guarantee you'll win the jackpot eventually. You most likely never will. The fact that you've been buying lottery tickets for 20 years does not give you any better odds than the guy who bought his first ticket today. And it shouldn't.

[Roperfive88]

But everybody will not draw in a liftetime. It's impossible to make the system in such a way that everyone will eventually draw. They just won't. Too many applicants and not enough tags. It's like with the lottery. Just being a loyal player and buying your tickets every week doesn't guarantee you'll win the jackpot eventually. You most likely never will. The fact that you've been buying lottery tickets for 20 years does not give you any better odds than the guy who bought his first ticket today. And it shouldn't.

[Curly]

But everybody will not draw in a liftetime. It's impossible to make the system in such a way that everyone will eventually draw. They just won't. Too many applicants and not enough tags. It's like with the lottery. Just being a loyal player and buying your tickets every week doesn't guarantee you'll win the jackpot eventually. You most likely never will. The fact that you've been buying lottery tickets for 20 years does not give you any better odds than the guy who bought his first ticket today. And it shouldn't.

[Stein]

Yep, WA has creep but it is just hidden a bit better due to the sheer number of people.

Think of it like this, if you buy 10 powerball tickets, you get a better chance (on paper) than some guy who buys one ticket. Look at the draw results and see the huge number of people with the most points that get an invitation to the loser's lounge.

[X-Force]

But everybody will not draw in a liftetime. It's impossible to make the system in such a way that everyone will eventually draw. They just won't. Too many applicants and not enough tags. It's like winning the lottery. Just being a loyal player and buying your tickets every week doesn't guarantee you'll win the jackpot eventually. You most likely never will. The fact that you've been buying lottery tickets for 20 years does not give you any better odds than the guy who bought his first ticket today. And it shouldn't.

I agree with you, my problem with the system is that it doesn't require any discretion. We have great general season hunts with deer, elk and bear so every year people have no excuse to get out in the woods. Discretion would be having to choose a permit species: elk or deer or moose or sheep or goat. Having to make that decision would allow people a greater opportunity to draw the permit that means most to them. A person could draw second or antlerless deer every year instead of waiting 4 or 6 or 8 years to draw. 1 species permitting would also allow people to have greater opportunities at drawing different species off their bucket list because there would be limited people applying for permits across the board. Points make sense but having so many species and categories doesn't for the limited amount of permits available.

WDFW wouldn't do a single species or Idaho style because the cost per permit would have to be $30-50 for per elk and deer and oil would have to be $75-120 to keep revenues constant from today.