A better point system - no points

[Slamadoo]

Something I haven't seen mentioned is the affect that these point systems are going to have on future hunters. By the time my sons get into hunting they are going to have zero chance at drawing any of these tags. There will be guys with 30+ points by then.

I think we are doing our future hunters and the future of hunting a disservice with these point systems. I am all for going the Idaho way. No points.

[RC3]

Make the application fee $50 and I bet you would have better odds and they would still get their money.

 That does nothing to address the topic.

Sorry, I guess I needed to say keep it the same and increase the fees, thought it was implied.  I would be for a system like Utah though.

[GameHunter1959]

Something I haven't seen mentioned is the affect that these point systems are going to have on future hunters. By the time my sons get into hunting they are going to have zero chance at drawing any of these tags. There will be guys with 30+ points by then.

I think we are doing our future hunters and the future of hunting a disservice with these point systems. I am all for going the Idaho way. No points.

I could be wrong, but I believe once an special permit applicant reaches a certain number of points; it is referred to as "max points". Once the applicant reaches max points, they are no longer accumulating additional draw points, each year. You can probably use the "search engine" on Hunt WA to clarify.

Today was the first time I ever drew any special permit, outside of Multi Season Deer and Antlerless permits. I drew Dayton Quality Bull - Modern with 20 points (20 years). I'm 41 years old. By the time I draw it again, I will likely be in my early to mid-60's, assuming WA continues to use the same point system.

[X-Force]

Points aren't entirely the issue. Categories are a huge issue.

IMO
All goat, sheep, moose permits should be OIL

All species should be a single category with 2 options.

1 oil or Deer and Elk
Or
1 of any species

$100 for oil application
$50 for deer or elk

If you think that sounds crazy... that's fine but requiring applicants to be discerning will make draw odds for individual permits substantially better, hunter participation on permits substantially better, entry into the permit game substantially better.

This state has OTC tags for deer and elk in every weapon category there is absolutely no reason not to get into the woods every year. Lots of quality and buck/bull odds are under 5% even under 1% odds for top point holders. Oil odds aren't measured in whole percent but in 10ths and 100ths... when points get to 30, 40, 50 what is going to be the point of the people starting out?

[Gringo31]

I think it is what it is.


Dropping all the points doesn't help everyone's average.  As odds drop (which I agree do), people will then decide to pay for the chance to play or not. 

I think we are wasting our time.  WE seem to think that maximizing opportunity is important to WDFW. 



It's not. 

[huntnphool]

I think it is what it is.


Dropping all the points doesn't help everyone's average.  As odds drop (which I agree do), people will then decide to pay for the chance to play or not. 

I think we are wasting our time.  WE seem to think that maximizing opportunity is important to WDFW. 



It's not. 

 You miss the big picture, once the point system is done, change to a better system, some suggest mirroring Idaho's, which then would increase opportunities.

[Bob33]

Something I haven't seen mentioned is the affect that these point systems are going to have on future hunters. By the time my sons get into hunting they are going to have zero chance at drawing any of these tags. There will be guys with 30+ points by then.

I think we are doing our future hunters and the future of hunting a disservice with these point systems. I am all for going the Idaho way. No points.

I could be wrong, but I believe once an special permit applicant reaches a certain number of points; it is referred to as "max points". Once the applicant reaches max points, they are no longer accumulating additional draw points, each year. You can probably use the "search engine" on Hunt WA to clarify.

Today was the first time I ever drew any special permit, outside of Multi Season Deer and Antlerless permits. I drew Dayton Quality Bull - Modern with 20 points (20 years). I'm 41 years old. By the time I draw it again, I will likely be in my early to mid-60's, assuming WA continues to use the same point system.

There is no defined limit on how many points a person can accrue.

[buglebrush]

It wouldn't matter how long it took, who cares if the guy with 5 points hangs out for 30 more years?

 Look at it this way Stein, right now your odds are decreasing each year with our current system, you understand that right?

 So rather than decreasing your odds each year, this would actually increase them while working to eliminate the point system, which would you prefer?

.

Exactly!  The biggest thing that would help draw odds would be to make everyone choose a single oil tag or any two of the others.     

[huntnphool]

 The first order of business would be to get a consensus from the hunters that the system needs to be changed, what percentage would we need going forward?

 The second would be to come up with a system that would do the best to accommodate everyone involved, hunters/state, and that the majority would agree too while causing the least amount of whining/litigation.

 Is there a perfect solution........doubtful, but if we all agree on #1 then something needs to happen, and we will not be happy if we leave it completely in the hands/minds of WDFW.

[Gringo31]

You miss the big picture, once the point system is done, change to a better system, some suggest mirroring Idaho's, which then would increase opportunities.

You may be right in that I'm missing it....

How does Idaho's system increase opportunity?  If you have to split between OIL and Deer/elk that definitely would cut out many names from the pool....... but how does half the people trying to get a tag increase opportunity?   I suppose you could argue that droping my odds in half so I can double my odds is progress?   

[buglebrush]

You miss the big picture, once the point system is done, change to a better system, some suggest mirroring Idaho's, which then would increase opportunities.

You may be right in that I'm missing it....

How does Idaho's system increase opportunity?  If you have to split between OIL and Deer/elk that definitely would cut out many names from the pool....... but how does half the people trying to get a tag increase opportunity?   I suppose you could argue that droping my odds in half so I can double my odds is progress?   

It vastly increases opportunity, because it vastly increases draw odds.  You could choose to chase hard tags or draw one every couple years too.

[huntnphool]

You miss the big picture, once the point system is done, change to a better system, some suggest mirroring Idaho's, which then would increase opportunities.

You may be right in that I'm missing it....

How does Idaho's system increase opportunity?  If you have to split between OIL and Deer/elk that definitely would cut out many names from the pool....... but how does half the people trying to get a tag increase opportunity?   I suppose you could argue that droping my odds in half so I can double my odds is progress?   

 I'll leave the comparison/explanation to the Idaho experts to explain, I've just noticed that many have pointed to that system as much preferred.

 I'll add this........IF we can agree Washington needs a change, and agree to change it........we had better be damn certain that we are happy with it before moving forward........because there will not be WDFW to blame after that.......except of course for the stellar management practices.

[dvolmer]

It will never ever never ever never change.  And if it did, it would be because someone convinced the State of Washington that by doing so they would increase more revenue to the state.  They could care less about anything except the dollar!  They don't care about if you get a tag or not.  The system now has a bunch of people that would love to get out of it but due to the high point value they have in some specific category they cant bring themselves to stop applying.  When in reality due to point creep and other issues their actual odds of drawing the permit is actually going down each year.  But the state doesn't care if you ever get a tag.  All they care about is how much money they will bring in and how they can dupe each of us each year to keep paying and putting in.

[tracksoup]

It will never ever never ever never change.  And if it did, it would be because someone convinced the State of Washington that by doing so they would increase more revenue to the state.  They could care less about anything except the dollar!  They don't care about if you get a tag or not.  The system now has a bunch of people that would love to get out of it but due to the high point value they have in some specific category they cant bring themselves to stop applying.  When in reality due to point creep and other issues their actual odds of drawing the permit is actually going down each year.  But the state doesn't care if you ever get a tag.  All they care about is how much money they will bring in and how they can dupe each of us each year to keep paying and putting in.

Nailed it...that's exactly right
The only chance to change the system is if people quit playing the game and that isn't going to happen

[idahohuntr]

The first order of business would be to get a consensus from the hunters that the system needs to be changed, what percentage would we need going forward?

This is the most critical...demonstrate a strong majority in support of change.  But the majority has to have the same objective - which I think many folks are voicing the opinion they would like to see improved draw odds. 

If enough people make enough noise to increase draw odds, particularly as we enter the 2018-2020 three year rule cycle...then let the state work with hunters to come up with various options to achieve this goal.  I believe they could come up with revenue neutral options, as many point out losing $$ is a non-starter for the Department.

I support a change if for no other reason than I believe long-term there are huge implications for recruitment and retention if we continue on with a system that is demonstrably producing the worst draw odds in the Western US.