The truth about our draw odds

[HoofsandWings]

I think the novelty of this new system will wear off in a couple of years.
If you look at the stats for goat, sheep and moose where almost everyone has the same number of points,
there still are people drawing the second, third or fourth choice.

Also, after today, we still have the raffles we can put in for.

[trophyhunt]

I agree with the last statement above, if you want to increase fee's even more than just put in for the raffles, please don't mention increasing the fee's!!!! These guys read a lot of these threads and they would love to hear us ask to raise the fee's.  We pay way too much as it is, it is ridiculous what kind of money they are taking from us. NO MORE FEE INCREASES- MR. WDFW.

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

 
This is really getting old, what all those who complain about the "Draw" need to understand, IT IS A LOTTERY !!
One point, ten points, sixteen points, twenty six points, it does not matter.
it is chance, and only chance.  If you buy a lottery ticket, play the slots, any sort of game of chance, you only win if you get lucky.
the odds are against you !
This state will never have enough "special permits" to make it so everyone gets an opportunity, so they have the "Special permit drawings"
the only real way to improve odds, will reduce not only $$$$, but reduce opportunity for the majority, and cause even more complaining.
So, I say, live with it, you don't have to like it, but that is what we have, you cannot win if you don't play, and yes, the chances of you drawing is slim to none, but somebody wins every year, it could be you !
Complaining about it, lets off steam, but is just complaining still.
It is like saying, I want to win $1,000,000 but the lottery system sucks because you have to get all the numbers right, how unfair.  I will never win because they don't limit the number of tickets they sell.
So, if you don't like the way the permit system is, too bad !, it is, what it is.
The truth is, you will probably NEVER get drawn for an OIL permit, and neither will one of your friends, but if you do get lucky and get drawn, or one of your friends does, CONGRATULATIONS !! YOU ARE LUCKY !!
Unfortunately that is the way it is, you can hunt almost all of the species that are OIL somewhere else, for a reasonable expense, with guaranteed tags.
Or you can complain about something you have no control over,

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know a good hiding place for the bodies of those who pissed me off.

[NRA4LIFE]

Amen brother.

[AndyCAK]

Isn't the point of the Washington point system to improve cumulative odds over a number of years?  And is it about absolute odds or comparative odds?  Sure, with 10 points you have less chance than the guy with 10 points last year, but you still have 100 times better chance than the guy who drew the tag last year.  I think the WDFW does the best job they can in managing game numbers to create long term, sustainable hunting opportunities.  To echo GoldTip, "There are just too many people in this state and not enough animals."

[Ridgerunner]

No offense Ridgerunner but it's pretty easy to be happy with the system when you've drawn a moose and sheep tag. What about the people who are just getting into hunting now and have no points?  They are so far behind in the game that their chances of ever drawing are almost zero. Additionally if you look at the original post, the chance of drawing actually decreased every year for every point level.

I'm not condoning a true preference point system, I am just suggesting limiting choices to one choice only (or if it makes you feel any better look at everyones first choice before any second or third choices). Also maybe require tag fees up front for OIL tags. Any way to decrease the number of applicants for a given hunt would be a good thing as far as odds go. 

Shane, no offense taken, but go back and read my posts on this subject prior to drawing my OIL tags, I felt the same way before I drew the tags, have I been lucky, heck ya, especially considering I didn’t apply for OIL tags until you didn’t have to not front the money so I was always 3 points below max, at the time when you did need to front the money I was broke and wouldn’t have been able to do it anyway.  The reason I like the system is that everyone has a chance of drawing and those who faithfully apply have a better chance each year.  I don’t like true preference point states as with low tag numbers it essentially becomes a once in a lifetime hunt even for deer or elk. 

The reason why Idaho’s system has better draw odds is because you have to choose one species to put in for each year, here we can put in for all 5 species.  I wouldn’t want to have to choose only one species, but that would really make the odds better. 

I’d like to see the application fees for the OIL tags to go up to $25 or $30 to keep those individuals out who aren’t serious about wanting to hunt those creatures.  I’ve always been in favor of making folks choose one OIL species to put in for (like Idaho) as well as drop the number of choices to 2.  I like that change for the quality hunts but it does make choosing units much more difficult as there are probably about 10 I’d like to put in for on an annual basis.  Any OIL tag is going to give a guy a great experience.

In the end its all about supply and demand, there is just too much demand and not enough supply in this state for quality hunts.   
 

[6x6in6]

It's this statement that is an out and out lie in the Weighted Points System Instructions in the regs:
"A weighted-point permit drawing system is used, which gives applicants who have failed to be selected in the past a better chance to be awarded a permit in the future. It is based on the application history of each applicant" and in particular, this one "Everyone has a chance to be selected, but those with more points have a better chance of being awarded a permit."
That is absolutely not the case for any OIL tag, and a Quality Bull tag.  Your chances DO NOT get better!!!  They get significantly worse every year!
And, courtesy of last years permit application category change, every other deer and elk permit is now that way too.   It may take a few years for your 2009 chances of winning one of these to come back to where they used to be, and then truly get better each year.  It may take a very long time for the Bull Tag chances to get back to where you were in 2009.  All depends on applicants and quantity of tags for the hunt choice in the coming year(s). 

Selkirk and 49DN Bull moose for example.
2007 a 12 point holder had a 1:104 and a 1:112 chance, respectively.
2008 a 13 point holder had a 1:111 and a 1:123 chance.
2009 a 14 point holder had a 1:116 and 1:138 chance.
2010 a 15 point holder went  to 1:124 and 1:151 chance.

Goat and sheep are backsliding even worse!!!

Effectively, what SticknString said is absolutely correct. Keep playing the lotto, somebody's got to get it.

[Little Dave]

In 2008 there were about 11914 special deer permits available.
In 2011 there are about 8973, that's down 25 percent in just three years.

Page 10 in the reg book offers some explanations why:

Lack of budget control:  "we now have a real chance to secure funding"
non-essential spending:  "other responsibilities"
new-spending: "started implementing an integrated management that considers prey-predator dynamics"
future obligations for taxpayers: "with a $837,000 federal grant"
loss of access: "after losing thousands of acres of prime hunting land"
soliciting tax increase support from least affected stakeholders: "together with campers, birdwatchers and others to support fees"

The truth about the draw odds is that chances will decrease as the denominator approaches zero.  The price will increase as supply exceeds demand.  If the denominator reaches zero points won't matter.

If you want better odds, method of draw is not going to solve anything.  It's like arguing with the grocer about the way he sells and labels fruit when what you really would like is more fruit or better quality fruit.  Don't waste your time focused on the wrong thing.

[shanevg]

Everyone who is saying it is pointless to complain about the system isn't reading my arguments. I understand that this is essentially a money grab for the WDFW (and honestly with recent budget cuts we all know they need all the money they can get) as well as a pure lotto for hunters who are applying. Every suggestion I am making would either make certain less desirable units easier to draw or increase overall draw odds across the board without losing revenue for WDFW. What can be pointless about discussing alternative options that meet the needs of both parties involved?

As for tag numbers, deer tags may have gone down but I believe overall numbers for all OIL tags have gone up since 2008.

If you don't like bouncing around new ideas than don't read this topic. The whole point of an online forum like this is discussions like this. And believe it or not, we can change things with WDFW. They do have public input periods. Ultimately for them it is all about revenue so any suggestions we come up with need to keep revenue up while hopefully improving odds overall for hunters.

And Ridgerunner, I have no problem with everyone having a chance to draw as in our existing system, I am just trying to suggest changes that will increase our odds within the confines of the existing system. Again, let's find a solution that can be beneficial to both sides.

[Ridgerunner]

Considering the 3 year process is coming up this summer should be a great opportunity to suggest changes. 

[Bob33]

Shane, I completely understand your perspective.  The cynicism of many comes from the fact that many have given input to WDFW, only to be ignored.

I wrote letters last year to the Wildlife Program and the Commission regarding the proposed permit changes.  WDFW specifically advertised the changes as being meant to increase draw odds. 

I personally know of at least ten individuals who also wrote letters of dissent about the proposed changes.

After the changes were approved and implemented, Dave Ware made several public comments how the changes were overwhelmingly supported by the hunting public, and how very few letters of dissent were received.

Perhaps it's not completely pointless to complain about the system and suggest changes, but to date most of those efforts have been futile.

The state made about $500K more in 2010 on the changes because the number of special permit applications essentially doubled.  It should be somewhat evident that doubling the number of permit applications does not enhance draw odds.

Could the state have raised $500K in other ways without drastically changing the draw system?  I think so.  Had they increased the permit application fee by $10, they could have sustained over a 50% decline in applications and still made another $500K.  If also would have reduced the number of applications, which would have improved rather than degraded the draw odds.

[bearpaw]

There is no "perfect" system, trust me.  If it went to the Idaho system with no points, people would still be bellyaching cuz they've never drawn an OIL tag and others have drawn all three.   If you leave it like it is, people will bellyache cuz they still haven't drawn with 27 bajillion points and some 8 year old drew on his first application.  Increase the COST of applying to lower the number of applicants and improve draw odds and revenue, and everyone will scream that it's becoming a rich mans game. 

There is just no "perfect" system, but in this state with high hunter numbers and low number of quality animal tags or OIL tags, the only way they can improve the system is to decrease the number of applicants in the pool.  There are two ways to do this and they should do both imho.  They should go to a every other year system much like Hilltop suggested, and they need to increase the cost to apply.  This would decrease the number of people playing the "special permit" game substantially and increase the odds of drawing, but everyone still gets to hunt each year, maybe not a special unit or elk every year, or deer every year, but everyone still gets to hunt.  There are just too many people in this state and too few animals.

I agree, there are many hunters and only so many animals, and no system is perfect. But rather than make it more restrictive to try and increase odds, how about we try to increase the number of animals to try and increase odds.

[dreamingbig]

I agree it is a lotto, but your odds keeping getting worse each year.  Similar to Powerball when the pot is $10 million vs $300 million.

[GoldTip]

There is no "perfect" system, trust me.  If it went to the Idaho system with no points, people would still be bellyaching cuz they've never drawn an OIL tag and others have drawn all three.   If you leave it like it is, people will bellyache cuz they still haven't drawn with 27 bajillion points and some 8 year old drew on his first application.  Increase the COST of applying to lower the number of applicants and improve draw odds and revenue, and everyone will scream that it's becoming a rich mans game. 

There is just no "perfect" system, but in this state with high hunter numbers and low number of quality animal tags or OIL tags, the only way they can improve the system is to decrease the number of applicants in the pool.  There are two ways to do this and they should do both imho.  They should go to a every other year system much like Hilltop suggested, and they need to increase the cost to apply.  This would decrease the number of people playing the "special permit" game substantially and increase the odds of drawing, but everyone still gets to hunt each year, maybe not a special unit or elk every year, or deer every year, but everyone still gets to hunt.  There are just too many people in this state and too few animals.

I agree, there are many hunters and only so many animals, and no system is perfect. But rather than make it more restrictive to try and increase odds, how about we try to increase the number of animals to try and increase odds.

Dale,

I fully agree.  My idea would increase the number of animals and would truly be easy to try.  Simply take the number elk tags purchased this year and divide it in half.  Let's say that half is 40,000 general elk tags.  Now next year they are only gonna sell 40,000 tags on a first come first served basis, double the price for an elk tag.  It's all on computer now, so they can keep track of who did and didn't get an elk tag, those 40,000 who didn't get a tag, they get one in 2013, the 2012 tag holders get one again in 2014 and so on and so forth.  Now because you doubled tag price there is no loss in revenue.  You have 50% less hunters in the woods pushing animals around so there is higher "escapement" on animals and an overall decreased harvest of elk, total.  Let's say there is a 30% decrease in harvest, thats 30% more that got bred and made it through the winter for the next year.

This system also increases drawing odds, as you can only apply for a "quality bull tag" on the years you yourself have a tag, decreasing the number of applicants by 50% each year as well.  Same thing, make a elk app $10.  Anyone here who wouldn't start paying $10 for a quality elk tag app with a 50% reduction in people applying for that tag? 

I agree 100% Dale, we can have our cake and eat it to, we get to hunt elk every other year, and we have more elk and better drawing odds.  We're only paying the price for a license every other year, so it truly costs us no more.  And if you compare our state to say Nevada or Arizona hunting elk every other year as a resident is actually pretty darn good.

[Lowedog]

I have never drawn an OIL tag and after 13 years of applying I am perfectly content with the way things are right now.  If I draw some time in my life... great!  If not then oh well.  There is a lot more important things to worry about than if I get to hunt a sheep or not.