Should Quality Buck & Bull tags go OIL?

[bobcat]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

But that won't change anything. Unless you're already a person who only applies for deer, or only applies for elk. Then I suppose it would help your odds. But if you're like most people who apply for both deer and elk every year, how is it a benefit if you were to apply for only deer one year, and then only elk the following year? So you've got less competition for the one you applied for, but you cut your odds in half by only applying for one instead of both. In the end, it wouldn't change anything.

[fishngamereaper]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

[ctwiggs1]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

So right now you have 3 different draws that you're involved in.  You might reduce the amount of competitors in your draw by a third, but you also reduce the amount of draws you're involved in by two thirds.

I just don't see how the math is any more in your favor than it is now.  There are guys who have drawn 2-3 OILs in a year.  A few years ago one guy on here drew all 3 (wish I had bookmarked that thread).  It pisses some guys off, but next year that could be you or me. 

Curtis

[bobcat]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

Similar to my last post, I don't see how making a person choose only one in the Bighorn sheep, mountain goat, and moose draw permits, would help odds. Yes you're reducing applicants per species, but each person is only in one draw instead of three, which reduces your odds of drawing something. Now having said that, I'd be fine with it as I only apply for moose, so it would benefit me. But overall I don't think it would be of any benefit to most people. Why try to fix what isn't broke?

[jackelope]

1 OIL is plenty in a year for 90% of the hunters in Washington.  Believe me...I'm already feeling a little overwhelmed. I can't imagine what I would do if I had 2.

I guess I just feel like if folks had to choose, reducing the number of applicants in each category would improve the odds. Even if it's just a little.

With all that said, I've been pretty lucky.  In 11 years of applying for permits, I've drawn a quality buck with 4 points, a buck deer permit with 6 and an OIL with 9.
 

[Stein]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

So right now you have 3 different draws that you're involved in.  You might reduce the amount of competitors in your draw by a third, but you also reduce the amount of draws you're involved in by two thirds.

I just don't see how the math is any more in your favor than it is now.  There are guys who have drawn 2-3 OILs in a year.  A few years ago one guy on here drew all 3 (wish I had bookmarked that thread).  It pisses some guys off, but next year that could be you or me. 

Curtis

Point creep happens when the guys with the most points don't get cleared out.  (Yes, I know how our system works, you can have point creep in a random draw system when the average points it takes to draw the tag goes up every year.)

To clear those guys out, you need fewer people entering the draw.  If you had to choose 1, your overall odds of drawing SOMETHING go down, but your odds of drawing ONE tag go up.  It forces people to pick what they really want and then gives them better odds at that thing.

Right now, I would guess a bunch of people (like me) put in for many things if not most or even all.  I put in for a goat tag, but I would much prefer a sheep or even a top elk tag.  If under a new system I put in for elk but not goats and another guy puts in for goats but not elk, we are both more likely to draw our top choice.

What to do with all the points is the question, the math would be a monster, but I think you could just keep what you have since you would only be using one at a time and it would clear them out much faster since you wouldn't be accumulating them nearly as fast.

[jackelope]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

Similar to my last post, I don't see how making a person choose only one in the Bighorn sheep, mountain goat, and moose draw permits, would help odds. Yes you're reducing applicants per species, but each person is only in one draw instead of three, which reduces your odds of drawing something. Now having said that, I'd be fine with it as I only apply for moose, so it would benefit me. But overall I don't think it would be of any benefit to most people. Why try to fix what isn't broke?

You don't think reducing applicants per species would increase a guy's odds of drawing that species?
I guess it might decrease the odds of a hail mary permit, but I can't imagine it actually would decrease the odds of drawing the permit you want.

[ctwiggs1]

If someone tells me "Hey you just drew a quality bull and an OIL tag", I'll be overwhelmed but I'm jumping in 100% and getting after it.  Give me that problem - I'll tackle it!!   

[bobcat]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

Similar to my last post, I don't see how making a person choose only one in the Bighorn sheep, mountain goat, and moose draw permits, would help odds. Yes you're reducing applicants per species, but each person is only in one draw instead of three, which reduces your odds of drawing something. Now having said that, I'd be fine with it as I only apply for moose, so it would benefit me. But overall I don't think it would be of any benefit to most people. Why try to fix what isn't broke?

You don't think reducing applicants per species would increase a guy's odds of drawing that species?
I guess it might decrease the odds of a hail mary permit, but I can't imagine it actually would decrease the odds of drawing the permit you want.

Yes, it probably would increase odds for the one species but now you're only in for one instead of three, which decreases your odds. Like I said, it would be great for guys like me who only apply for one. But I feel it would be unfair to those who apply for all three.

[trophyhunt]

If I could swear on this site I'd say F no to this question!  5 year waiting period sounds great.

[Jpmiller]

What about ordering your permit choices? Everyone gets selected in order in one big draw but instead of doing hunt choices by area you apply for one area for each permit and then order your permits by your preference. You get selected you get your highest remaining permit and you are removed from the pool.

So if I have goat first and sheep second and I get drawn I get a goat tag if it's left and if not sheep (and so on down my list) and once I have a permit my name is removed and it goes to the next person. It eliminates drawing multiple tags a year but you would get more people with something.

I don't know how points would work.

[Bob33]

I would strongly support us being able to apply for deer or elk, and not both, yearly and only one OIL choice per year.

I wouldn't.  You could go a lifetime and not draw a single OIL tag. Having to choose almost eliminates you from drawing all 3 in your lifetime in WA.

You say people may not draw one and this idea eliminates you from drawing all 3???  If you cant draw one how do you get all 3. I have almost max points for Sheep and Goat and my fare share for Moose. If you forced people to pick one Oil you would see the number of applicants reduced to half if not more in each category, dramatically increasing your odds of drawing a tag. I would be happy as a clam to draw one WA Oil in my lifetime.

Similar to my last post, I don't see how making a person choose only one in the Bighorn sheep, mountain goat, and moose draw permits, would help odds. Yes you're reducing applicants per species, but each person is only in one draw instead of three, which reduces your odds of drawing something. Now having said that, I'd be fine with it as I only apply for moose, so it would benefit me. But overall I don't think it would be of any benefit to most people. Why try to fix what isn't broke?

You don't think reducing applicants per species would increase a guy's odds of drawing that species?
I guess it might decrease the odds of a hail mary permit, but I can't imagine it actually would decrease the odds of drawing the permit you want.

I think the point is that limiting applicants to one specie increases the odds of drawing that specie, but doesn't increase the overall odds of getting one of the three OIL permits. Today I can apply for three OIL permits which gives me three chances to draw at least one. If someone is intent on only drawing moose, goat, or sheep then limiting choices would help them. However, many hunters view them somewhat equally and would be thrilled to get any of the three.

[huntnphool]

If I could swear on this site I'd say F no to this question!  5 year waiting period sounds great.

 I agree with the f-no, but what good would a 5 year wait do? For a unit with 10 tags available, it would decrease the pool by 50 applicants. Will people seriously feel better about this system if 50 less applicants were reduced from a pool that on average has 1500?

 For units with 1 tag, will reducing the applicants by 5 really make you feel better about your odds?

 IMO, we need a system that dumps the points!

[Mfowl]

I'd support a waiting period after a tag is drawn in a given category but only if you could still accrue ghost points during that time.

[ctwiggs1]

If I could swear on this site I'd say F no to this question!  5 year waiting period sounds great.

 I agree with the f-no, but what good would a 5 year wait do? For a unit with 10 tags available, it would decrease the pool by 50 applicants. Will people seriously feel better about this system if 50 less applicants were reduced from a pool that on average has 1500?

 For units with 1 tag, will reducing the applicants by 5 really make you feel better about your odds?

 IMO, we need a system that dumps the points!