Post by: SteelheadTed on June 14, 2017, 12:52:08 PM
http://fw.ky.gov/Hunt/Documents/examinationofelkpreferencepoints.pdf (http://fw.ky.gov/Hunt/Documents/examinationofelkpreferencepoints.pdf)
It does a good job explaining why point systems tend to fail over time. I realize this isn't a new revelation but I think this particular document does a good job of explaining the issue with point systems.
Kentucky had a unique opportunity that many western states don't have in that they've only offered elk tags for the last few years. So, they could chose the system they thought would work best based on what they can see from many other different systems used around the country. They had a chance to learn from the mistakes of other states. It would be hard for a western state that has had a point system for many years to get away from that system without really angering those that have spent considerable money accumulating points over the years.
I still think the best system is a random draw, no points and if you draw a tag you can't apply for some number of years so that you don't end up drawing multiple times in a row when others have never drawn.
Post by: bobcat on June 14, 2017, 12:55:24 PM
Post by: steeleywhopper on June 14, 2017, 01:02:52 PM
Post by: Bob33 on June 14, 2017, 01:05:23 PM
Post by: WSU on June 14, 2017, 01:10:40 PM
Post by: Katmai Guy on June 14, 2017, 01:19:36 PM
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.
Post by: Stein on June 14, 2017, 01:21:33 PM
I would be in favor of a simple draw, the quality elk tags should even be oil.
Post by: Pathfinder101 on June 14, 2017, 01:30:32 PM
I like the old way, one choice for deer and one choice for elk. If you applied for special permit elk you could not hunt on opening day Satyrday you had to wait until the Monday to hunt. If you drew a elk permit you could not apply again for four years.
Steely, WDFW would fire you in a heartbeat. You aren't making nearly enough money for the state with your plan...
Post by: highside74 on June 14, 2017, 01:52:11 PM
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.
I would gladly give up all my points for a no points system. We only end up with one number in the hat anyway. If you have 200 entries they draw 200 numbers for you. Then they take the lowest number you have and only use that number.
Post by: bobcat on June 14, 2017, 01:55:07 PM
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.
I would gladly give up all my points for a no points system. We only end up with one number in the hat anyway. If you have 200 entries they draw 200 numbers for you. Then they take the lowest number you have and only use that number.
They could go ahead and use all your numbers but only the lowest number would be of any benefit. If you don't draw any of your choices with the lowest number, you definitely won't get them with a higher number.
Post by: Romulus on June 14, 2017, 02:16:45 PM
In our state all the doe and cow hunters complained they never got the chance to hunt bulls because they kept using their points on drawing antlerless....so the state came up with bull..cow...quality etc etc and now they still cant draw a bull tag but cant draw a cow tag either since the trophy hunters can now put in for bulls and cows.........
Bottom line the people happy are those who draw the tags and whichever system that is it takes luck or the system is very restrictive to new applicants.....you take out luck and only those who got in early have a chance... we have a decent system.... I would prefer a hybrid that gives a few tags to those with the most points and then a bonus system like ours for the remaining tags like Utah does...
Post by: BA Mongor on June 14, 2017, 02:17:39 PM
I would love the opportunity to gift my points to my son or wife, or even sell them if I wanted. Why shouldn't we have the right, especially since we bought them and own them. I've committed to Idaho for the remainder of my hunting years, and have 18 points for quality deer, bull elk, goat and moose. I still want my goat and moose though !
BA :twocents:
Post by: Bob33 on June 14, 2017, 02:28:11 PM
Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
Post by: WSU on June 14, 2017, 02:40:51 PM
Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
I'm sure there would be. But, with the hunter recruitment problems, it probably is ultimately unhelpful to WDFW to have an entire generation of hunters who have even worse odds of drawing a permit.
Post by: Bob33 on June 14, 2017, 02:48:14 PM
Lots of new hunters get into the points game each year. There were 3,083 applicants for an "any moose" permit in 2016 with one point, up from 1,941 the year before. The more disgruntled people are those at the upper ends of the point totals who haven't been drawn, and while their odds aren't great they're better than if there is only one pool of applicants.Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
I'm sure there would be. But, with the hunter recruitment problems, it probably is ultimately unhelpful to WDFW to have an entire generation of hunters who have even worse odds of drawing a permit.
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 02:48:34 PM
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. :chuckle:
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.
Post by: WSU on June 14, 2017, 02:53:38 PM
Post by: Curly on June 14, 2017, 02:54:41 PM
With the drop in hunters the states need money......people who put in for 20 years complained when a new person drew the first year and that is when points were started....many variations....all the systems are pretty good......States with no points are foolish because you know which states I don't apply for if I don't care to spend the money on every state? the ones with no points for 2 reasons....less chance for me to draw in those states as well as I lose nothing in next years draw chances for missing a year.
In our state all the doe and cow hunters complained they never got the chance to hunt bulls because they kept using their points on drawing antlerless....so the state came up with bull..cow...quality etc etc and now they still cant draw a bull tag but cant draw a cow tag either since the trophy hunters can now put in for bulls and cows.........
Bottom line the people happy are those who draw the tags and whichever system that is it takes luck or the system is very restrictive to new applicants.....you take out luck and only those who got in early have a chance... we have a decent system.... I would prefer a hybrid that gives a few tags to those with the most points and then a bonus system like ours for the remaining tags like Utah does...
That's not the way I have heard it. I heard that it was the guys always applying for the most coveted bull tags wishing they could apply for easier to draw permits without losing their chance at the really good bull permits.
Either way, wdfw used complaints as a reason to create the category system and squeeze even more money out of us while making it harder for both people applying force permits and people applying for those coveted bull permits. :twocents:
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 03:02:35 PM
I wonder how long that would take in practice?
Years, but what are the alternatives, rip the bandage off?
You have to remember that the state can't simply remove the system, they would face litigation from those that have "invested" for years, and the state won't risk that.
A model could be run but there are so many factors to consider.
Each year how many draw in each category and would drop down?
Each year how many die, the average age of hunters is getting up there, how do you factor that?
Once the percentage of tags began favoring the "0" group, how many would choose to stay in the point group, how do you factor that?
Etc, etc, etc.
It took years for us to get to this point, it will take years to fix it........for those of us that actually understand the system we have is decreasing odds now.
Post by: Stein on June 14, 2017, 03:13:37 PM
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 03:17:23 PM
It wouldn't matter how long it took, who cares if the guy with 5 points hangs out for 30 more years?
Depending on what hunts you apply for, it may take that long now. I know I'll never draw again once I finally get a bull elk tag........or at least be waiting 20+ years, which will put me in the handicap hunt anyway. :chuckle:
Post by: shanevg on June 14, 2017, 03:19:15 PM
:yeah:I wonder how long that would take in practice?
Years, but what are the alternatives, rip the bandage off?
You have to remember that the state can't simply remove the system, they would face litigation from those that have "invested" for years, and the state won't risk that.
A model could be run but there are so many factors to consider.
Each year how many draw in each category and would drop down?
Each year how many die, the average age of hunters is getting up there, how do you factor that?
Once the percentage of tags began favoring the "0" group, how many would choose to stay in the point group, how do you factor that?
Etc, etc, etc.
It took years for us to get to this point, it will take years to fix it........for those of us that actually understand the system we have is decreasing odds now.
Post by: WSU on June 14, 2017, 03:20:15 PM
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 03:22:15 PM
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?
Post by: Bob33 on June 14, 2017, 03:25:56 PM
Odds increase for applicants at the lower end of the pools. Going from one year to two years, you increase the number of names in the hat by 300%. Once you get to the mid point and beyond, your odds do start to decrease slightly. Game departments count on an influx of newcomers every year, and those at the upper end won't get out because they've got so many years invested.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?
Post by: WSU on June 14, 2017, 03:30:36 PM
Post by: Fletch on June 14, 2017, 03:37:22 PM
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 03:42:47 PM
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
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 03:51:52 PM
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.
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 03:59:01 PM
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.
Post by: huntnphool on June 14, 2017, 04:04:39 PM
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?
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 04:11:45 PM
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 :hello:
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on June 14, 2017, 04:32:49 PM
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.
Post by: Mfowl on June 14, 2017, 04:36:35 PM
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?
Post by: trophyhunt on June 14, 2017, 04:52:41 PM
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.I love this idea, you should pass this on to Wdfw!
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. :chuckle:
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.
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 05:04:55 PM
Post by: SteelheadTed on June 14, 2017, 05:05:51 PM
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.
Post by: MuleySniper on June 14, 2017, 05:07:17 PM
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 05:10:06 PM
Post by: SteelheadTed on June 14, 2017, 05:16:08 PM
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.
Post by: trophyhunt on June 14, 2017, 05:23:04 PM
Post by: 520backyard on June 14, 2017, 05:31:41 PM
I love the idea of pay to play!!! If only the rest of the country worked the same way..... :hello:
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.
Post by: LabChamp on June 14, 2017, 05:52:14 PM
Post by: MuleySniper on June 14, 2017, 06:23:30 PM
I love the idea of pay to play!!! If only the rest of the country worked the same way..... :hello:
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'
Post by: idahohuntr on June 14, 2017, 06:26:06 PM
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. :twocents:
Post by: trophyhunt on June 14, 2017, 06:30:23 PM
Post by: Falcon on June 14, 2017, 09:15:59 PM
Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
:yeah:
Agree with Bob on this one.
Post by: acrocker on June 14, 2017, 09:18:03 PM
The cause of the disgruntled-ness of the newer applicants is the 'point creep' that results from the current system, and the longer odds that any newcomer has in the drawing pool. I'm sorry, but didn't every current applicant go through the very same process when they first applied? I mean, anybody starting to try and draw a quality tag right now faces long odds, but 20 years from now they'll be the beneficiary of the 'point creep' issue and have the odds more (relatively speaking) in their favor... Why is it that we constantly have to cater to the 'instant gratification' need of people in society and why can't we just accept that those that came before us, who have been applying for years and years (and maybe decades) should be afforded some kind of preference over some Johnny-come-lately who just decided to draw a tag this year. I mean, Johnny isn't excluded, by any means, but he has a statistically lower chance of drawing than someone who had been diligently trying for 20 years. Again - if Johnny is serious about wanting to draw that covereted tag, then 20 years of diligently applying from now he will be the one in the catbird seat and the new guys will have to start earning their points - it always comes around, if you care to stay on the train.
Newcomers join the ranks every year, and I am absolutely all for having new hunters in our ranks - but those of us that have been working on getting that coveted tag for years shold get some kind of leg up in the game over somebody else who just happened to apply this year for the first time ever and for all we know may never even apply for an elk hunt again.
Again, maybe I'm missing something but I really believe that persistence should be awarded, or at least preferred.
Post by: Stein on June 14, 2017, 10:06:41 PM
With point creep, you will never draw as that date goes at least one year in the future every year. Next year it is 10, year after it is 12, then 13, then 15. You never get any closer to drawing.
With point creep, we are basically idiots for even applying, we should save the money and buy something in another state or another tag as we won't ever draw it.
Post by: shanevg on June 14, 2017, 10:07:19 PM
1. The current point system is bad for everyone. The total pool is so watered down that all the high point holders. (Roughly 6-10+ points depending on the tag) are actually seeing their odds DECREASE every year. That includes Mac point holders. Everyone is losing and no one is winning.
2. In your scenario where someone applies for 20 years, his odds will actually be worse 20 years from now then they are for him right now. By that time the pool of max point holders (or close to) will be so top heavy and have so much more of an exponentially large size of the total pool that 20 points will actually have lower statistics than 1 or 2 points has now. There just aren't enough tags to knock enough max point holders out of the pool each year to make up for the new applicants coming in.
Post by: shanevg on June 14, 2017, 10:09:22 PM
No, point creep is a relatively new issue. The system is set up to clear out the high point holders so that you basically have a good guess at when you will draw. Tag XYZ usually goes with 9 points, fine, I'll draw it in 9-12 years.
With point creep, you will never draw as that date goes at least one year in the future every year. Next year it is 10, year after it is 12, then 13, then 15. You never get any closer to drawing.
With point creep, we are basically idiots for even applying, we should save the money and buy something in another state or another tag as we won't ever draw it.
That's actually not correct in a bonus point system like WA has. It would be accurate in Preference Point states like CO or WY. (Exactly why I never applied for sheep/moose in WY.)
Point creep is different in preference point states. See my previous post.
Post by: Bob33 on June 14, 2017, 10:10:39 PM
Newcomers join the ranks every year, and I am absolutely all for having new hunters in our ranks - but those of us that have been working on getting that coveted tag for years shold get some kind of leg up in the game over somebody else who just happened to apply this year for the first time ever and for all we know may never even apply for an elk hunt again.Persistence is preferred in a sense. The longer one applies without being drawn, the more points he has. The more points, the better odds of being drawn relative to fewer points. A newcomer with one point has one name in the hat; the person with 20 points has 400 names in the hat: 400 times better odds of being drawn.
Again, maybe I'm missing something but I really believe that persistence should be awarded, or at least preferred.
A concern is that the person with 20 points will not necessarily have better odds of drawing next year with 21 points. He will have better odds than the person with 20 points, but not necessarily better than he had this year. He will have 441 names in the hat next year, a 10% increase, but all the newcomers that had one point and one name in the hat this year will have two points and four names in the hat next year. The large number of applicants in the lower point totals going from one to four names in the hat (300% increase),or four to nine (125% increase) dilute the pool and can reduce the overall odds of those with high point totals.
Post by: Stein on June 14, 2017, 10:14:59 PM
No, point creep is a relatively new issue. The system is set up to clear out the high point holders so that you basically have a good guess at when you will draw. Tag XYZ usually goes with 9 points, fine, I'll draw it in 9-12 years.
With point creep, you will never draw as that date goes at least one year in the future every year. Next year it is 10, year after it is 12, then 13, then 15. You never get any closer to drawing.
With point creep, we are basically idiots for even applying, we should save the money and buy something in another state or another tag as we won't ever draw it.
That's actually not correct in a bonus point system like WA has. It would be accurate in Preference Point states like CO or WY. (Exactly why I never applied for sheep/moose in WY.)
Point creep is different in preference point states. See my previous post.
Somewhat different on paper, but not really in practice. If you don't clear out max point holders the result is the same. You buy points but it doesn't really matter. Either way, you pay your fee and it is a lottery. You have 1.1% odds with a few more points and I have 1.05%. Result is neither of us draw - ever.
It's fun to put in, but guys really get bent out of shape when they collect 20+ points and then look up the odds.
WA could never go preference points because the spigot would shut off once people understood what is going on. The pinprick of light at the end of the tunnel keeps us playing.
Post by: EyeTooth on June 15, 2017, 06:45:31 AM
If anyone were to get litigious if the bandage of the current point system were to be quickly removed, they should first have to prove that they didn’t receive any free points in the above transition.
I begged the game department not to give free points across the board, at the very least, without a public comment period and they/he did it anyway.
All of us that had no chance of a quality hunt, due to the fact that we were paying attention to how bad the odds of drawing them were, surely had wild game meat and hunting experiences removed from our tables and lives. Were there any legal problems caused by that?
I don’t blame any hunters or point holders past or present for this new, bad system that we have now. Just WDFW.
There are several things that would need to be considered while making what I would consider to be a good change. (I’m well aware that what I consider to be a good change wouldn’t be considered a good change by everyone else). My opinion is just an opinion. I don’t claim to know all of the considerations needed, but I do think that a good change is doable without costing people any more money than they are spending now. The WDFW would still need money.
The first thing would be to thoroughly research every other no point system that is out there. Then, the next most important thing would be to run real numbers to see what would really be fair and also better for everyone’s overall odds of drawing, not individuals, but everyone’s. In the beginning, some people’s odds would increase and others would decrease. My goal would be to find a fair system, that is the best for the vast majority of people, educate everyone, have a good discussion and public comment period, and go from there. Nothing is perfect, but what we have now isn’t good.
There will always be some people that just can’t seem to draw, no matter what system we have. That is a major bummer, but you can’t base a whole system on avoiding that. Is that my two cents? Maybe three?
Good luck to all of us!
I'll be quiet now.
Post by: boneaddict on June 15, 2017, 06:46:26 AM
Post by: shanevg on June 15, 2017, 10:23:29 AM
Points are the Devil.:yeah: :devil:
Post by: EyeTooth on June 15, 2017, 12:01:15 PM
Post by: theleo on June 15, 2017, 12:32:15 PM
For the OIL tag situation, also follow Idaho in that if you apply for one your limited to OTC tags for all other big game animals. The state would hate it but it'd be great for the guys really wanting those tags.
Post by: shanevg on June 15, 2017, 12:36:27 PM
If Washington mimicked Idaho I'd start putting in for tags here, as is WDFW gets my money when I buy my fishing license and that's it. People like point systems from the aspect that your odds go up with every point, as opposed to it being completely random. Random isn't always fair but the law of averages works towards your favor every year you put in. If a tag has an 10% success rate at drawing every year in a random draw odds are you'll draw it every once in a 10 year span, but it's still possible you could go 27 years not drawing that tag and hit a lucky streak the last 3 years getting the tag each year. From the bottom looking up I'll pay to roll the dice in Idaho than pay to start climbing the points ladder here that gets an extra 3/4 of a rung added to it each year.
For the OIL tag situation, also follow Idaho in that if you apply for one your limited to OTC tags for all other big game animals. The state would hate it but it'd be great for the guys really wanting those tags.
Would love to see WA go to ID system of Pick either A.) Deer/Elk B.) Sheep C.) Moose D.) Goat.
And we as hunters need to stop giving WDFW the excuse of they won't do do that due to loss of income. They are a government agency. Their job is to provide the best hunting opportunities to the citizens of the state, not maximize revenue. :bash:
Post by: Special T on June 15, 2017, 12:46:54 PM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: theleo on June 15, 2017, 01:22:35 PM
Yeah, just looked at Idaho's site. Out of 112 moose hunts available to apply for (not individual tags but hunt numbers) 21 of those hunts had single digit draw odds and of those 16 of them were 5% or better success for drawing. If your a resident there it's not a matter of wondering if you'll get to hunt them someday, just a matter of what year you hit the tag. 91 hunts where a chance of drawing is 10% or greater. Anybody have WA numbers to compare to that?If Washington mimicked Idaho I'd start putting in for tags here, as is WDFW gets my money when I buy my fishing license and that's it. People like point systems from the aspect that your odds go up with every point, as opposed to it being completely random. Random isn't always fair but the law of averages works towards your favor every year you put in. If a tag has an 10% success rate at drawing every year in a random draw odds are you'll draw it every once in a 10 year span, but it's still possible you could go 27 years not drawing that tag and hit a lucky streak the last 3 years getting the tag each year. From the bottom looking up I'll pay to roll the dice in Idaho than pay to start climbing the points ladder here that gets an extra 3/4 of a rung added to it each year.
For the OIL tag situation, also follow Idaho in that if you apply for one your limited to OTC tags for all other big game animals. The state would hate it but it'd be great for the guys really wanting those tags.
Would love to see WA go to ID system of Pick either A.) Deer/Elk B.) Sheep C.) Moose D.) Goat.
And we as hunters need to stop giving WDFW the excuse of they won't do do that due to loss of income. They are a government agency. Their job is to provide the best hunting opportunities to the citizens of the state, not maximize revenue. :bash:
Post by: bobcat on June 15, 2017, 01:44:52 PM
Post by: Bob33 on June 15, 2017, 01:49:26 PM
Overall, Washington's moose tag odds are about 0.6%. Or 1 in 150.The odds are much worse for applicants with low point totals. If you really want to hunt moose in your lifetime, you shouldn't count on getting drawn in Washington.
Post by: Brushbuster on June 15, 2017, 02:01:10 PM
Post by: Bob33 on June 15, 2017, 02:14:37 PM
Are those the stats from this year? If so, I feel special in an unlucky sort of way. I'm one of the 8 people with 22 points that didn't draw. It is nice to see the lions share of the tags go to people with the most points.They are from 2016.
Post by: bearpaw on June 15, 2017, 04:52:20 PM
Lots of new hunters get into the points game each year. There were 3,083 applicants for an "any moose" permit in 2016 with one point, up from 1,941 the year before. The more disgruntled people are those at the upper ends of the point totals who haven't been drawn, and while their odds aren't great they're better than if there is only one pool of applicants.Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
I'm sure there would be. But, with the hunter recruitment problems, it probably is ultimately unhelpful to WDFW to have an entire generation of hunters who have even worse odds of drawing a permit.
I much prefer Idaho's system! Having said that I also understand that Washington is stuck with a points system, too many hunters have too big of investment, some hunters have bought ghost points rather than apply, so it's pretty hard to take that away. I do think WDFW could phase in an alternate system if they wanted to give us options. But I'm not sure WDFW would want to change it, they are bringing in a lot of money with people applying for all these different draw options. :dunno:
Post by: huntnphool on June 15, 2017, 07:14:16 PM
Lots of new hunters get into the points game each year. There were 3,083 applicants for an "any moose" permit in 2016 with one point, up from 1,941 the year before. The more disgruntled people are those at the upper ends of the point totals who haven't been drawn, and while their odds aren't great they're better than if there is only one pool of applicants.Someone with 20 points has better odds of being drawn, because he's paid and applied for 20 years. If the point system is eliminated, his odds would be the same as everyone else. There would be an uproar.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.
I'm sure there would be. But, with the hunter recruitment problems, it probably is ultimately unhelpful to WDFW to have an entire generation of hunters who have even worse odds of drawing a permit.
I much prefer Idaho's system! Having said that I also understand that Washington is stuck with a points system, too many hunters have too big of investment, some hunters have bought ghost points rather than apply, so it's pretty hard to take that away. I do think WDFW could phase in an alternate system if they wanted to give us options. But I'm not sure WDFW would want to change it, they are bringing in a lot of money with people applying for all these different draw options. :dunno:
If they did something like I posted, they would retain permit application fees, the point system would be the only part phased out.
Post by: RC3 on June 15, 2017, 07:35:17 PM
Post by: huntnphool on June 15, 2017, 07:38:48 PM
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. ;)
Post by: BENCHLEG on June 15, 2017, 07:46:47 PM
Post by: Odell on June 15, 2017, 07:57:04 PM
Post by: BENCHLEG on June 15, 2017, 08:12:43 PM
Post by: Stein on June 15, 2017, 08:31:32 PM
This is how it should go 75% to the highest point holders 25% for others if you draw you are out of the draw for 2 years ... they screwed us back when they made everyone equal and didn't make us choose our point options . If you want a cow that's your shot if you want a buck that's your shot etc etc. pick your choice and roll with it they suckered the majority into thinking this was a good thing now it is biting everyone in the butt. OiL'S should be front the money 75% of the tags if you front the money 25% if you don't And a cap on non residents follow other states like 3% max to non residents. If they do that it will be better I have other ideas but they don't want logical they want $$$$$ figure it out people...
Wouldn't matter unless you happen to have max or near max. Look at the above stats, there are a couple thousand people with 15+ points. It would take several lifetimes to clear those out.
Post by: Jimmy33 on June 15, 2017, 08:31:48 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on June 15, 2017, 09:39:22 PM
I have had lengthy email discussions on these topics with WDFW officials and there doesn't seem to be any movement. I would suggest flooding them with official proposals about this subject. If you do it in an official way, they have to provide official answers. I have actually had them call me to ask me not to send my requests forward due to the large amount of work it would create. Follow this link http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/how_to_participate.html to see how to send in official rule making changes. I am so irritated by our ridiculous system that I would be willing to do just about anything else. I love Idaho's system and think it is by far the best option. I would be willing to drop all of my points, pretty much 14 in everything (even my sheep points), to go to Idaho's system. Please get involved and flood their system with your ideas. They are certainly paying no attention to just a few of us...If folks want a change, I think you have to drop the idea of providing specific suggestions/tweaks/changes to modify the point system. There has to be some consensus/strong support for an overall objective...what are you trying to change or improve? With draws I think you could key in on 3 different objectives:
1. Increase draw odds for everyone
2. Maximize application opportunity
3. Reward top point holders
Obviously you can blend and mix/match all 3 of these objectives, but if you select (and get broad support) for just one of these objectives, then I think you can start to have serious discussion about how to best achieve the objective.
Right now, WDFW is largely in category 2 - maximize application opportunity. We can all put in multiple choices for dozens of categories.
If you want to focus on increasing odds of drawing any one tag, then eliminating a points system or using other ways to limit applicants (select a species, front fees, increase fees, 1 choice per species, 1 category per species etc.) would be potential tools.
If you believe the top point holders should get increased draw odds (which would mean significantly reducing everyone else's odds) then things like preference point systems or allocating a portion of tags to top point holders are mechanisms to achieve this goal.
Bottom line - there are no free lunches in allocating a limited resource. But if folks seriously want to change a point system they first need to convince WDFW decision makers that sportsman broadly support a different overarching objective than the current model of maximizing application opportunity. :twocents:
Post by: Slamadoo on June 15, 2017, 09:55:55 PM
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.
Post by: RC3 on June 15, 2017, 10:41:21 PM
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.
Post by: GameHunter1959 on June 15, 2017, 10:51:12 PM
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.
Post by: X-Force on June 15, 2017, 11:17:38 PM
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?
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 01:34:11 PM
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. :bash:
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2017, 01:38:14 PM
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. :bash:
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.
Post by: Bob33 on June 21, 2017, 01:40:07 PM
There is no defined limit on how many points a person can accrue.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.
Post by: buglebrush on June 21, 2017, 01:47:57 PM
.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. :twocents:
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2017, 01:51:04 PM
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. :bdid:
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 01:52:47 PM
Quote
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? :dunno:
Post by: buglebrush on June 21, 2017, 01:56:07 PM
It vastly increases opportunity, because it vastly increases draw odds. You could choose to chase hard tags or draw one every couple years too.QuoteYou 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? :dunno:
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2017, 02:01:17 PM
QuoteYou 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? :dunno:
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. :chuckle:
Post by: dvolmer on June 21, 2017, 03:32:52 PM
Post by: tracksoup on June 21, 2017, 03:49:27 PM
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.:yeah:
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
Post by: idahohuntr on June 21, 2017, 04:46:12 PM
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.
Post by: bobcat on June 21, 2017, 05:00:48 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on June 21, 2017, 05:48:43 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 06:09:42 PM
Quote
Cost is one way to reduce applicants, but reducing choices would have a similar effect. 1 OIL or Deer/Elk...and 1 or 2 choices per species. High demand tags would still be tough (but exponentially better odds than exist today); the most dramatic improvement would likely be on antlerless hunts and the mediocre buck and bull hunts.
So far I think this is all good discussion. I have a hard time just bumping up the prices. I hate pay to play, even though I admit it would be effective, I would be against it.
I don't think that you can say you get "better odds than exist today". I suppose the real question is would you rather have 1 10% chance or 10 1% chances. That's what I see happening. I'm not saying I'm necessarily against it....but don't know that it increases odds. It would increase odds for your #1 pick......but makes the odds for "other" pics that you have today.....zero.
Post by: bobcat on June 21, 2017, 06:20:37 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 06:38:29 PM
If you were limited to only one pick. It would keep certain things local. Guys wouldn't be putting in for units they've never heard of but Entiat, Peaches and Dayton would be hammerd.
Post by: winshooter88 on June 21, 2017, 07:02:58 PM
Post by: ctwiggs1 on June 21, 2017, 07:10:05 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 07:12:39 PM
I agree with you ctwiggs1. BUT! We can't keep encouraging more hunters AND no maximize harvest to tag holders in a sustainable way. Predators, poachers etc need increased pressure.
Post by: ctwiggs1 on June 21, 2017, 07:14:20 PM
BTW - I just re read your sheep story. You and I are going to become buds after I draw the raffle and buy you a beer to pick your brain! :chuckle: :tup:
Post by: Gringo31 on June 21, 2017, 07:20:46 PM
Apologize for getting side tracked :chuckle:
Post by: Bullkllr on June 22, 2017, 03:44:45 PM
I wonder if limiting it to one category would see success rates increase?
It may be another topic, but I think that would do more to improve odds than points-vs- no points.
Post by: ScottE on June 22, 2017, 10:42:27 PM
The people who were assigned the lowest random number were awarded the tags, it would have been the same with no points, either you get lucky or you dont.
Post by: huntnphool on June 22, 2017, 11:01:14 PM
Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me points or no points there will still be the same number of people trying for the same number of permits?
The people who were assigned the lowest random number were awarded the tags, it would have been the same with no points, either you get lucky or you dont.
Like so many that have read this thread, you are missing a big part of the discussion. ;)
Post by: SteelheadTed on June 23, 2017, 10:02:35 PM
Has anyone ever done some statiscal comparison? The likelihood of a person with 1 point, 20, and the chances of winning the small state lotto where you then afford a guided hunt in BC?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Yes, Kentucky did. See link at the beginning of this thread
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 24, 2017, 09:23:54 AM
Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me points or no points there will still be the same number of people trying for the same number of permits?I don't know about that, but can't really predict/prove that wouldn't be the case. Would more people apply for Blue Mountain permits if the high roller point holders were back at zero? It kind of seems to steer people to other permits seeing large numbers of guys with 20-30 points going for one area. Would the guys with high points still apply for the coveted permits if they didn't have an edge? And finally, without points, there wouldn't be ghost pointing--so either you are getting more people actively trying for the permit or a complete reduction in applicants. :dunno:
The people who were assigned the lowest random number were awarded the tags, it would have been the same with no points, either you get lucky or you dont.
I was pretty wrong about predicting early muzzy season after WDFW opened all the new units...I thought people would spread out evenly to all the GMUs with a loyal following staying in the old, but instead the old GMUs seemed abandoned and the new ones were like war zones.
Post by: bobcat on June 24, 2017, 09:33:23 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 24, 2017, 09:40:22 AM
Post by: bobcat on June 24, 2017, 09:53:18 AM
Post by: steeleywhopper on June 24, 2017, 10:52:52 AM
With point build up, many people seem to feel invested in the game until their points are finally burned. People buying in each year because they still have points with value. Would a significant number walk away from the draws if the points didn't accumulate? Kind of like the raffle...some years guys don't get tickets, not a big deal since everything would be new each year.
I keep saying I'm done with Washington, but I've invested so much already it makes it hard to walk.
Post by: Jimmy33 on June 24, 2017, 11:03:27 AM
With point build up, many people seem to feel invested in the game until their points are finally burned. People buying in each year because they still have points with value. Would a significant number walk away from the draws if the points didn't accumulate? Kind of like the raffle...some years guys don't get tickets, not a big deal since everything would be new each year.I'm doing just this...I have every year been putting in for easier and easier draws...this year I finally drew a quality elk but burned 14 points in observatory to get it. I've drawn my bull tag and currently have zero points in all other categories but OIL tags and my quality and buck tags ( which I'm having a heck of a time drawing). I will be walking away once I draw those two permits. If they do ever go to a no point sytem, I'll come back. Too many better options out there in other western states...there's a reason why GO Hunt doesn't do any work on us...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: HoofsandWings on June 24, 2017, 02:00:04 PM
There were no points for deer, elk, bear. Luck of the draw.
When the points system was first implemented, I drew sheep and moose in 3 years. It was a pretty even playing field back then with a max of 4 points when I drew moose. That is the point system was 4 years old.
My guess is people with lots of points and never have been drawn, put in for only one area, year after year. I read that in this forum some years ago when I guy drew a moose tag for a unit which included his farm/ranch.
Post by: SteelheadTed on June 24, 2017, 02:49:42 PM
With point build up, many people seem to feel invested in the game until their points are finally burned. People buying in each year because they still have points with value. Would a significant number walk away from the draws if the points didn't accumulate? Kind of like the raffle...some years guys don't get tickets, not a big deal since everything would be new each year.I'm doing just this...I have every year been putting in for easier and easier draws...this year I finally drew a quality elk but burned 14 points in observatory to get it. I've drawn my bull tag and currently have zero points in all other categories but OIL tags and my quality and buck tags ( which I'm having a heck of a time drawing). I will be walking away once I draw those two permits. If they do ever go to a no point sytem, I'll come back. Too many better options out there in other western states...there's a reason why GO Hunt doesn't do any work on us...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My understanding is GOHunt plans to add Washington it's just that it's more complicated and takes time to research.
Post by: Jimmy33 on June 24, 2017, 03:05:03 PM
I think you're right that they do plan on eventually adding it...it is a complicated system and for me it is no longer worth the time it takes to draw the permits. I was just stating the fact that it is not a coincidence we're the last state to be in their system. While I'll agree there are sone great hunts here in Washington, they don't even compare to other states both in ability to draw and opportunity, both trophy and numbers wise. The WDFW is very proud of what they have and it's really not that good.With point build up, many people seem to feel invested in the game until their points are finally burned. People buying in each year because they still have points with value. Would a significant number walk away from the draws if the points didn't accumulate? Kind of like the raffle...some years guys don't get tickets, not a big deal since everything would be new each year.I'm doing just this...I have every year been putting in for easier and easier draws...this year I finally drew a quality elk but burned 14 points in observatory to get it. I've drawn my bull tag and currently have zero points in all other categories but OIL tags and my quality and buck tags ( which I'm having a heck of a time drawing). I will be walking away once I draw those two permits. If they do ever go to a no point sytem, I'll come back. Too many better options out there in other western states...there's a reason why GO Hunt doesn't do any work on us...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My understanding is GOHunt plans to add Washington it's just that it's more complicated and takes time to research.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Mr Mykiss on June 26, 2017, 02:51:59 PM
Great idea sir.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.I love this idea, you should pass this on to Wdfw!
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. :chuckle:
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.