A better point system - no points

[huntnphool]

Stick with the points system but pay for tags up front.  This has the potential of slimming the pool of applicants.

110% on board. However, the WDFW gets too much money with the current system app fees to think about it as a serious option. IMO its the only way odds get better, less people putting in

You guys are referring to the OIL's, essentially WDFW does make you front the hunt money for deer/elk by requiring the purchase of your license before you can apply.

Having everyone pay the full price of the tag for OIL apps would no doubt drive many out of applying. Figure if you had to spend 1200+ for each hunter in your family on top of you 300 bucks in licenses. Many couldnt afford to apply fo all, and would force people to choose.

I understand that, but are we really to the point of limiting the hunts to only those with means?

[LabChamp]

Stick with the points system but pay for tags up front.  This has the potential of slimming the pool of applicants.

110% on board. However, the WDFW gets too much money with the current system app fees to think about it as a serious option. IMO its the only way odds get better, less people putting in

You guys are referring to the OIL's, essentially WDFW does make you front the hunt money for deer/elk by requiring the purchase of your license before you can apply.

Having everyone pay the full price of the tag for OIL apps would no doubt drive many out of applying. Figure if you had to spend 1200+ for each hunter in your family on top of you 300 bucks in licenses. Many couldnt afford to apply fo all, and would force people to choose.

I understand that, but are we really to the point of limiting the hunts to only those with means?

Seems to work well in Idaho BUT you do have to choose one OIL species to put in for regaurdless there. As for the money part, Im going out on a limb here and gonna say the average income in ID is much less than here in WA so I dont see a problem. You have to pay to play 

[blackveltbowhunter]

I like huntnphools solution. One i hadn't heard before. Seems like it could work well and eventually get back to a manageable baseline. I don't feel like its terrible now, but what is most concerning is the one way track its on. Unless serious changes occur in game management, odds WILL only get WORSE.

Increase the number of animals and thus the number of permits. Best solution IMO. The department seems to have no interest in that so we have the current system.

I would also be in favor of significant increases in app fees and decreasing categories as well as implementing a waiting period following successful draws.

[Mfowl]

Stick with the points system but pay for tags up front.  This has the potential of slimming the pool of applicants.

110% on board. However, the WDFW gets too much money with the current system app fees to think about it as a serious option. IMO its the only way odds get better, less people putting in

You guys are referring to the OIL's, essentially WDFW does make you front the hunt money for deer/elk by requiring the purchase of your license before you can apply.

Having everyone pay the full price of the tag for OIL apps would no doubt drive many out of applying. Figure if you had to spend 1200+ for each hunter in your family on top of you 300 bucks in licenses. Many couldnt afford to apply fo all, and would force people to choose.

I understand that, but are we really to the point of limiting the hunts to only those with means?

I like the idea but is anyone really gonna trust wdfw to refund their money when they're not drawn?

[trophyhunt]

Start next year, no more accruing points, those that draw a permit go to zero and have no more points going forward in that category. Each year a chunk of hunters drop out of that pool, increasing the odds of those still in the game.

 As a percentage of hunters in that draw drop out, they are creating a additional group/% of hunters with "0" points. Each year, adjust the percentage of permits in the "point group" with those in the "0" point group, so that even though they are no longer in the "point group", they still have a chance to draw a permit, albeit a small chance.........no different than now.

 Once you get to the 51/49 area, you can drop out of the point group if you want and join the "0" point group since the higher percentage of permits would then be in the "0" point group.

 Yes this would take years to do, but it would eliminate the point system, while at the same time NOT eliminating the "investment" everybody to date has made, also increasing the odds of those still in, rather than reducing their odds.

I love this idea, you should pass this on to Wdfw!

[LabChamp]

  great idea!

[SteelheadTed]

Like it or not, the system we have will be in place for a long time. To eliminate points, the applicants with existing points would need to be compensated and that's not going to happen.

Not sure why people with points would need to be compensated, they got what they paid for, a chance to be drawn for a permit each year they applied.

What they paid for was chance to be drawn AND a point to be used to increase odds in future years.  That second part is very important in terms of what people would be giving up.

[MuleySniper]

I love the idea of pay to play!!! If only the rest of the country worked the same way..... 

[LabChamp]

Lol no joke... we live in an era where everyone thinks they deserve something for nothing. Its called WORK people. Work more, spend more, save more... simple

[SteelheadTed]

The problem with pay to play is that wildlife is held in trust for everyone.  This isn't an iPhone.  Since wildlife belongs to all of us, the idea that it's only a matter of money that can buy a chance at an animal doesn't work.  If we let a free market system decide who hunts, a lot of us on this forum wouldn't be hunting.

This is one of the few areas where I think a free market can't work based on the assumption that wildlife belongs to everyone.

[trophyhunt]

Anyone know who the permit manager is and their email address ?  I'd like to copy and paste huntnphools idea to them, and link it to the commission.  If they understand the point creep and how the odds will drop in the future, you'd think they would at least talk about it??   They won't be losing money and that's going to be their only concern.

[520backyard]

I love the idea of pay to play!!! If only the rest of the country worked the same way..... 

Well maybe they should just auction off all the OIL tags. You ever want to hunt a bighorn sheep? Do you have anywhere from 80,000 to 480,000 because that is what they go for. After all if it's pay to play the guy with the most money wins LOL. Nah let luck decide and roll the dice.

[LabChamp]

Taking the pay to play term a little differently than what I was refering to but i see what youre saying. It would still be a draw just the same as it is. Youd have better odds, but have to front the money during the app period. If not drawn you get the tag price refunded minus the app fee. It would still be affordable to put in for the tags you wanted. At the same time enough to not want to put in for 16 hunts

[MuleySniper]

I love the idea of pay to play!!! If only the rest of the country worked the same way..... 

Well maybe they should just auction off all the OIL tags. You ever want to hunt a bighorn sheep? Do you have anywhere from 80,000 to 480,000 because that is what they go for. After all if it's pay to play the guy with the most money wins LOL. Nah let luck decide and roll the dice.

No that's a little different then fronting tag money before applying which I was referring to. I have friends who vacation in Hawaii every year. He doesn't hunt out of state. Just sayin'

[idahohuntr]

As time goes on I think more and more people see the wisdom of states like Idaho and New Mexico (and Kentucky) that never bought into these ponzi schemes called point systems.   As someone with only 7-9 points in various categories...I would be fine with them ending the point system immediately, although phools suggestion is far more politically acceptable. 

I do not believe the state has a legal or contractual obligation to continue with a point system simply because people have a bunch of points.  At most, if someone has only purchased points and NEVER applied for a hunt, refund them $6 per point or whatever the cost was and send them on their way...if at anytime those folks ever applied for a tag with their points...tough...you had a chance and didn't get lucky.  Frankly, that's part of the problem with a point system to begin with...they create this false sense of entitlement to extremely limited public resources.