Hunting Washington Forum

Big Game Hunting => Other Big Game => Topic started by: boneaddict on January 18, 2009, 09:56:47 AM

Title: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 18, 2009, 09:56:47 AM: I wonder what Washingtons break down is. Doesn't quite measure up since Wa is bonus versus preference, but......
How would you like to be one of the 14 point holders right now. :yike:
http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/TotalPreferencePointsMS2008.pdf (http://gf.state.wy.us/downloads/pdf/TotalPreferencePointsMS2008.pdf)
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Red Dawg on January 18, 2009, 10:02:26 AM: looks good. I wish I had that many.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 18, 2009, 10:31:51 AM: Alot of people hate our system, but I sure like it better than Wyomings. Essentially there isn't much of a chance in hell to get drawn unless you are the top holders of preference points. Two areas I look at for putting in...one is at 12 points to be drawn and one is at 9. Couple more years for me @ $75 a crack for moose, and sheep is even uglier.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Red Dawg on January 18, 2009, 10:56:42 AM: ya i am buying points for deer and antelope. Not quite as much but it cost an arm and a leg. Not that I care about the cost of anything but it almost seems cheaper to buy an outfitter tag and go that route. By the time you pay all that money for points you wont have to pay that much more for an outfitter and you can hunt the wilderness.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 18, 2009, 11:23:48 AM: Point systems are interesting............I think they create more applications and money for game managers and I guess that is the point. I have to wonder if odds for everone would be better if there were no points at all.............The one complaint that I have with Washington and Nevada's system is that a guy like my self who is not in the max point pool will only get further and further behind the max point holders and for the OIL tags it makes it almost hopeless.

I guess they are going to overhaul the entire thing so.......that should be interesting to see if we get a max pool or limit applications.....either way you have to think about applications as a 50+ year endeavor :twocents:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: popeshawnpaul on January 18, 2009, 11:36:48 AM: They need to make the process tougher like in the old days. That way, people who really want it will go through the time and effort. Paper applications only and front all the money. Limit nonresidents like all the other states.

Wyoming is still worth it. For a few bucks you get a 1% shot at sheep. Sad, but that's as good as it gets. Who knows, when I'm 88 years old and a max point holder I'll draw sheep and someone can push my wheelchair up the hill to get one. :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 18, 2009, 11:43:42 AM: Quote
Who knows, when I'm 88 years old and a max point holder I'll draw sheep and someone can push my wheelchair up the hill to get one.

Thats my plan too.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Red Dawg on January 18, 2009, 11:45:27 AM: ya no doubt :'(
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 18, 2009, 12:44:35 PM: Well the first year I applied to a state for Moose that didn't have points I drew. The first year I applied for one of the most sought after elk tags in another state that didn't have points, I drew...... go figure.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: ELKBURGER on January 18, 2009, 12:48:56 PM: Sounds like lightning does strike the same place twice!
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 18, 2009, 01:13:20 PM: maybe it will strike a sheep tag this year.......
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: blacktailer on January 18, 2009, 06:53:19 PM: Pope, I agree with you 100%. I suggested doing the same thing a while back on another related thread and just got blasted. If I recall, years ago you had to front the money for sheep, goat and moose. I believe it was $50.00, and all but $5.00 was refunded if you didn't draw. I would be willing to bet that would cut the number of applicants down by at least 50%; possibly more. It's so simple when applying for tags at $5.00 a pop, that most people put in for everything', often not having a clue what they're applying for. I think it was either "Streak", "Bear" or "Timber" that ran into the only tag holder for one of our local goat hunts two years ago. The guy had mentioned something like he wished he hadn't drawn the tag and didn't know why he put in for it. Said he'd rather be Fall turkey hunting. That's is just B.S. I think if we all had to cough up a resonable amount of $$$ up front, odds would go up greatly for the guys that are really interested in drawing the tags. My 2 cents!!!
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: luvtohnt on January 18, 2009, 07:06:21 PM: I understand my uncle is a Wyoming resident and it took him 41 years to draw a COW moose tag!!

Brandon
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: billythekidrock on January 18, 2009, 07:30:59 PM: I agree and would gladly pay full price ahead of time. I would even let them hold my money all year, every year and let them draw interest.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 18, 2009, 07:35:26 PM: Fronting the $3150 for sheep in Wyoming is a bit steep
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Red Dawg on January 18, 2009, 07:50:36 PM: :yike: its a good thing i am not into out of state sheep hunting.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: MLBowhunting on January 18, 2009, 10:43:57 PM: The only time i will sheep hunt is when i get the cleman mtn or the swakane draw :chuckle:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: NRA4LIFE on January 19, 2009, 08:33:39 AM: Try drawing a Non-Res Colorado elk permit for unit 201. I have 17 preference points and it takes 19 to draw. Next year I'll have 18 points and it will take 20 to draw. The points needed to draw have been incrementing by 1 every year now for about 10 years. I may die before I can ever draw that tag. Sad.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Gobble on January 19, 2009, 08:37:20 AM: Quote from: NRA4LIFE on January 19, 2009, 08:33:39 AM
Try drawing a Non-Res Colorado elk permit for unit 201. I have 17 preference points and it takes 19 to draw. Next year I'll have 18 points and it will take 20 to draw. The points needed to draw have been incrementing by 1 every year now for about 10 years. I may die before I can ever draw that tag. Sad.

:'( I feel for ya Gary
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: popeshawnpaul on January 19, 2009, 05:44:00 PM: Wyoming sheep is $2266. It is refundable but you must pay a $14 application fee and $100 for the preferance point for sheep if you don't draw...which you won't.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: SuperDave on January 23, 2009, 09:48:04 PM: I have posted this before, the sad part about out of state hunts like wyoming, arizona , nevada well hell all of them, if your not in the game now, you will never draw! It's all about the mighty $$$! How about Utah this year, allowing an individual to apply for all big game species!!! $$$$$$$ The younger generation will never be able to afford an out of state hunt!
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: NWTFhunter on January 24, 2009, 01:43:34 AM: What is there in the way of Canada?
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Elkstuffer on January 24, 2009, 11:27:08 PM: I finally dropped out of the Wy sheep game. It was ok when it only cost $7.50 for a point but $100 is a little steep for something that will always be out of reach.

I'm still in for moose. At 8 points I'm going to wait 3-4 more years and draw a premium tag.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: Elkstuffer on January 24, 2009, 11:28:36 PM: Quote from: NWTFhunter on January 24, 2009, 01:43:34 AM
What is there in the way of Canada?

Canada has some awesome hunting with very little pressure but you are required to hire a guide for all big game hunting. $$$$$
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: NWTFhunter on January 24, 2009, 11:50:40 PM: How much would it cost on average ?

I read on another forum today that Mt is still good? Im waiting to get the specifics on that though !
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: NWTFhunter on January 25, 2009, 03:06:50 AM: Ok, got the scoop on MT. They sell an over the counter tag, with a set harvest quota. Anyone can hunt until the quota is filled. NR tag is about $700 then you can DIY or hire a guide.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: huntnphool on January 25, 2009, 09:54:44 AM: Quote from: NWTFhunter on January 25, 2009, 03:06:50 AM
Ok, got the scoop on MT. They sell an over the counter tag, with a set harvest quota. Anyone can hunt until the quota is filled. NR tag is about $700 then you can DIY or hire a guide.

What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 25, 2009, 10:05:54 AM: There is alot more to that scoop than that NWTF. ALOT MORE....
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: 270Shooter on January 25, 2009, 10:29:52 AM: Quote from: huntnphool on January 25, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
Quote from: NWTFhunter on January 25, 2009, 03:06:50 AM
Ok, got the scoop on MT. They sell an over the counter tag, with a set harvest quota. Anyone can hunt until the quota is filled. NR tag is about $700 then you can DIY or hire a guide.

What are you talking about?
I think he is talking about the unlimited units. Where anyone can buy a tag and hunt, but you have to call in everyday and you can hunt until the quota is met, which I am sure isn't long.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 25, 2009, 12:28:07 PM: I know what he is talking about, and it ain't that simple unless you have aome money to burn
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 25, 2009, 12:28:27 PM: I think you can kill any sheep you want can't you :dunno:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: huntnphool on January 25, 2009, 12:29:41 PM: Quote from: boneaddict on January 25, 2009, 12:28:07 PM
I know what he is talking about, and it ain't that simple unless you have aome money to burn

:yeah:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 25, 2009, 12:32:29 PM: Well if you are fast enough with your vehicle you can still get one out of the Swakane. Might even get a couple filed photos in before they confiscate it.
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 25, 2009, 12:34:17 PM: Whole new meaning to road hunter..........maybe "Dick" can help out :chuckle:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: boneaddict on January 25, 2009, 12:38:58 PM: I've heard of Chappaquiddick but never Chipsadick
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: WDFW-SUX on January 25, 2009, 12:47:16 PM: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Wyoming versus Washington
Post by: NWTFhunter on January 25, 2009, 05:55:46 PM: Quote from: 270Shooter on January 25, 2009, 10:29:52 AM
Quote from: huntnphool on January 25, 2009, 09:54:44 AM
Quote from: NWTFhunter on January 25, 2009, 03:06:50 AM
Ok, got the scoop on MT. They sell an over the counter tag, with a set harvest quota. Anyone can hunt until the quota is filled. NR tag is about $700 then you can DIY or hire a guide.

What are you talking about?
I think he is talking about the unlimited units. Where anyone can buy a tag and hunt, but you have to call in everyday and you can hunt until the quota is met, which I am sure isn't long.

270, yes that is the way it was explained to me.
Bone, why do you say there is more to it than that, and hint that it is more costly ? I was told that it is around 700... Is that incorrect ?
I havent gotten to the MT regs page to do more research.