Post by: JimWA on January 07, 2023, 03:34:56 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on January 07, 2023, 04:06:02 PM
That’s without bonus (poacher points)
Post by: Timberstalker on January 07, 2023, 04:06:42 PM
Post by: CarbonHunter on January 07, 2023, 04:13:43 PM
Or was it 96?
Post by: JimWA on January 07, 2023, 04:15:32 PM
Post by: CarbonHunter on January 07, 2023, 04:22:47 PM
I’m not sure on max for goats, but I think max for deer and elk is about 28/29
That’s without bonus (poacher points)
Maximum for goat is the same as deer and elk. Points started the same year and the only real change was the great point split disaster of 2010.
Post by: Timberstalker on January 07, 2023, 04:28:02 PM
:tup:
Post by: Buckjunkie on January 07, 2023, 04:49:41 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 07, 2023, 04:59:32 PM
Post by: CarbonHunter on January 07, 2023, 05:14:53 PM
Post by: Falcon on January 07, 2023, 06:14:14 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 07, 2023, 07:08:52 PM
Post by: actionshooter on January 07, 2023, 07:31:34 PM
Post by: Caseknife on January 07, 2023, 07:44:56 PM
Post by: Ridgerunner on January 07, 2023, 08:01:55 PM
Post by: Caseknife on January 07, 2023, 08:23:36 PM
Post by: sagerat on January 07, 2023, 08:33:48 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 07, 2023, 09:07:47 PM
I probably would have drawn years ago if they still required you to pay upfront.more high point holders draw w OIL tags, you are gonna draw! This is your year !
Post by: JimWA on January 08, 2023, 03:23:39 PM
Post by: JimWA on January 08, 2023, 03:28:57 PM
Post by: pickardjw on January 08, 2023, 03:41:04 PM
With max points for Goat, according to GoHunt, you have a 0.11% - 0.82% chance of drawing depending on which tag.
Post by: boneaddict on January 15, 2023, 07:40:13 AM
Post by: highside74 on January 15, 2023, 09:19:36 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 15, 2023, 09:31:19 AM
I loved the pay up front, I'd have been drawn years ago. Two of the best draw hunts I have ever been on were states with no points, drawn first time appliedour odds would be much better I bet!
Post by: bobcat on January 15, 2023, 09:23:48 PM
The fact that you only get one number in the draw no matter how many points you have has always burned my butt.
You get the lowest number- and that's the only one that matters. I don't get why people always say this. :dunno:
Post by: Stein on January 15, 2023, 09:50:36 PM
I don't believe I've ever seen a list of how many people have how many points for each category in Washington. Neither GoHunt Insider or Epic Outdoors has that info either.
With max points for Goat, according to GoHunt, you have a 0.11% - 0.82% chance of drawing depending on which tag.
I don't think WDFW publishes that, part of their low-transparency data program. I'm sure it would be grim, but you can already come to that conclusion if you look at the projected odds from any of the parties you mention.
Publishing how many points the winning hunter used is about as misleading as you can get. It's like saying the lottery winner bought 2 tickets, so if I buy 2 next drawing I'm probably going to win.
Post by: huntnphool on January 15, 2023, 11:52:40 PM
Seems like a lifetime ago when they started the point thing. I can remember actually being excited about it. Before points it was basically one choice and wait for a postcard in August. Not sure I would have been as excited about them had I been able to see what they have done across the west.
It’s time the system was fazed out!
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
Post by: idahohuntr on January 16, 2023, 08:30:50 AM
Honestly...with the current commission...this might have a chance if someone/group was willing to push for it.Seems like a lifetime ago when they started the point thing. I can remember actually being excited about it. Before points it was basically one choice and wait for a postcard in August. Not sure I would have been as excited about them had I been able to see what they have done across the west.
It’s time the system was fazed out!
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
Post by: D-Rock425 on January 16, 2023, 08:45:09 AM
I think it because they don't know how the system works or completely understand it.The fact that you only get one number in the draw no matter how many points you have has always burned my butt.
You get the lowest number- and that's the only one that matters. I don't get why people always say this. :dunno:
Post by: highside74 on January 16, 2023, 10:35:56 AM
I think it because they don't know how the system works or completely understand it.The fact that you only get one number in the draw no matter how many points you have has always burned my butt.
You get the lowest number- and that's the only one that matters. I don't get why people always say this. :dunno:
I know exactly how it works. If you have 15 points yet get 15x15 chances at a low number. That's it, your one number counts toward whether you get a tag or not. Guys with 20 points lose to guys with 1 or 2 points every year. It's a random number generator that has no weight towards guys with high number of points. Maybe I should have explained better in my post what part burned my butt.
Post by: Bob33 on January 16, 2023, 10:40:50 AM
The person with 20 points has 400 numbers to select the lowest value from. The person with 1 point has one number to select the lowest value from. The person with 20 points is far more likely to get a lower number than the person with 1 point. Yes, a person with one point can be drawn when a person with 20 points is not, but that really doesn't occur very often. It seems like it does because there are thousands of applicants with one point and relatively few with 20 or more.I think it because they don't know how the system works or completely understand it.The fact that you only get one number in the draw no matter how many points you have has always burned my butt.
You get the lowest number- and that's the only one that matters. I don't get why people always say this. :dunno:
I know exactly how it works. If you have 15 points yet get 15x15 chances at a low number. That's it, your one number counts toward whether you get a tag or not. Guys with 20 points lose to guys with 1 or 2 points every year. It's a random number generator that has no weight towards guys with high number of points. Maybe I should have explained better in my post what part burned my butt.
Post by: Falcon on January 16, 2023, 03:49:21 PM
The person with 20 points has 400 numbers to select the lowest value from. The person with 1 point has one number to select the lowest value from. The person with 20 points is far more likely to get a lower number than the person with 1 point. Yes, a person with one point can be drawn when a person with 20 points is not, but that really doesn't occur very often. It seems like it does because there are thousands of applicants with one point and relatively few with 20 or more.I think it because they don't know how the system works or completely understand it.The fact that you only get one number in the draw no matter how many points you have has always burned my butt.
You get the lowest number- and that's the only one that matters. I don't get why people always say this. :dunno:
I know exactly how it works. If you have 15 points yet get 15x15 chances at a low number. That's it, your one number counts toward whether you get a tag or not. Guys with 20 points lose to guys with 1 or 2 points every year. It's a random number generator that has no weight towards guys with high number of points. Maybe I should have explained better in my post what part burned my butt.
:yeah:
Bob is right on this. Someone please tell me of 1 person in the last 5 years drawing a oil tag with 1 point?
It might be 1 or possibly 2. Extremely rare. I have dawn 2 goat tags and moose tag. I have max sheep
Points. I doubt I will ever draw. There is simply too many people in
The draw. Simple as that :sry:
Post by: Rainier10 on January 16, 2023, 04:30:58 PM
Post by: Falcon on January 16, 2023, 04:36:36 PM
Anyone who says points don’t matter need to do the math.
Our system isn’t the greatest. I wish we we had Idaho’s no point and pick
One animal draw system, but we don’t :sry:
Post by: vandeman17 on January 16, 2023, 04:48:12 PM
I believe you. My point is it’s pretty rare.
Anyone who says points don’t matter need to do the math.
Our system isn’t the greatest. I wish we we had Idaho’s no point and pick
One animal draw system, but we don’t :sry:
I think most people understand that more points mean better odds but the important part that people tend to not understand is two fold. First, even with a boat load of points, premiere deer/elk tags and OIL tags have very very very poor odds. Every time I hear someone complain about not drawing because they have 15, 20 25 whatever amount of points and they applied for Entiat quality deer it makes me shake my head. Even with 20 points you still have barely over a 1% chance of drawing that tag. Second, which goes hand in hand with my first point, is that those premiere tags having such low odds meaning that there is a very small increase in chances to draw between 2 points and 18 points. According to gohunt which just uses historical data, two points in Entiat is .01% chance to draw and 18 points is 1%. Hunter A with 2 points and Hunter B with 18 points mathematically speaking still have terrible odds yet Hunter B has a WAY higher probabilty of feeling like he or she deserves to draw because they have so many points. Its a lottery, plain and simple. As soon as we pretty much forget about points and view it like buying a powerball, the better we will all be :twocents:
Post by: highside74 on January 16, 2023, 05:51:55 PM
Post by: Bob33 on January 16, 2023, 05:55:59 PM
Points do change the odds. In your example of two applicants, the one with 18 points has a 100 fold better chance than the applicant with two points. I would rather have a 1 in 100 chance rather than a 1 in 10,000 chance. I do understand your point that both have poor odds.I believe you. My point is it’s pretty rare.
Anyone who says points don’t matter need to do the math.
Our system isn’t the greatest. I wish we we had Idaho’s no point and pick
One animal draw system, but we don’t :sry:
I think most people understand that more points mean better odds but the important part that people tend to not understand is two fold. First, even with a boat load of points, premiere deer/elk tags and OIL tags have very very very poor odds. Every time I hear someone complain about not drawing because they have 15, 20 25 whatever amount of points and they applied for Entiat quality deer it makes me shake my head. Even with 20 points you still have barely over a 1% chance of drawing that tag. Second, which goes hand in hand with my first point, is that those premiere tags having such low odds meaning that there is a very small increase in chances to draw between 2 points and 18 points. According to gohunt which just uses historical data, two points in Entiat is .01% chance to draw and 18 points is 1%. Hunter A with 2 points and Hunter B with 18 points mathematically speaking still have terrible odds yet Hunter B has a WAY higher probabilty of feeling like he or she deserves to draw because they have so many points. Its a lottery, plain and simple. As soon as we pretty much forget about points and view it like buying a powerball, the better we will all be :twocents:
Post by: vandeman17 on January 16, 2023, 06:33:19 PM
Points do change the odds. In your example of two applicants, the one with 18 points has a 100 fold better chance than the applicant with two points. I would rather have a 1 in 100 chance rather than a 1 in 10,000 chance. I do understand your point that both have poor odds.I believe you. My point is it’s pretty rare.
Anyone who says points don’t matter need to do the math.
Our system isn’t the greatest. I wish we we had Idaho’s no point and pick
One animal draw system, but we don’t :sry:
I think most people understand that more points mean better odds but the important part that people tend to not understand is two fold. First, even with a boat load of points, premiere deer/elk tags and OIL tags have very very very poor odds. Every time I hear someone complain about not drawing because they have 15, 20 25 whatever amount of points and they applied for Entiat quality deer it makes me shake my head. Even with 20 points you still have barely over a 1% chance of drawing that tag. Second, which goes hand in hand with my first point, is that those premiere tags having such low odds meaning that there is a very small increase in chances to draw between 2 points and 18 points. According to gohunt which just uses historical data, two points in Entiat is .01% chance to draw and 18 points is 1%. Hunter A with 2 points and Hunter B with 18 points mathematically speaking still have terrible odds yet Hunter B has a WAY higher probabilty of feeling like he or she deserves to draw because they have so many points. Its a lottery, plain and simple. As soon as we pretty much forget about points and view it like buying a powerball, the better we will all be :twocents:
Yep but the 18 point holder tends to feel like they deserve the tag because of their points.
Post by: huntandjeep on January 16, 2023, 06:45:47 PM
I Lost 10 Goat and Ram points in that debacle .
the great point split disaster of 2010.
Post by: time2hunt on January 16, 2023, 07:08:45 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: sagerat on January 16, 2023, 08:03:47 PM
Exactly. 20 points and you are still barely a 1% chance of drawing. That's trash and we all know it. I've drawn a Moose tag, 2 quality elk, 1 bulk elk, 1 quality buck and 1 buck since 2004 when I started putting in for tags. 12 points for Moose was the most I had when I drew. I'm grateful but there are a lot of guys that have been putting in for way longer and haven't even come close to sniffy a tag. Our system is flawed but I think they arwbto far down the rabbit hole to fix it now.
Only flaw I see is allowing guys to apply for everything and having multiple categories for each species. The fact is most people will never draw the premium tags no matter how many points they have. There’s isn’t enough tags to go around plain and simple. At least they aren’t charging $100 for the semi useless points, yet…
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 16, 2023, 08:48:25 PM
Lots of benefits to a system with no points, but rewarding the people who have applied and not drawn for a long time is not one.
Post by: KNOPHISH on January 16, 2023, 09:01:07 PM
Post by: huntnphool on January 16, 2023, 09:50:31 PM
Why wasn’t the system removed once the herds rebounded from the harsh winter? :rolleyes:
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 06:11:11 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2023, 06:29:27 AM
Post by: Duckslayer89 on January 17, 2023, 06:32:14 AM
I have to admit it, I kinda do feel like I deserve a tag after waiting 27 years of applying. I guess that's wrong, but my young life is gone and the points sucked me in.
You could draw a tag just might not be THE one you want.
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2023, 06:41:28 AM
, very true.I have to admit it, I kinda do feel like I deserve a tag after waiting 27 years of applying. I guess that's wrong, but my young life is gone and the points sucked me in.
You could draw a tag just might not be THE one you want.
Post by: vandeman17 on January 17, 2023, 08:26:24 AM
This is just nuts. People complaining about how the guy with 20 points can't draw, so let's go to the Idaho system. Really? Let's make the guy who's applied for 20 years have the same odds as the guy who passed hunter ed last week?
Lots of benefits to a system with no points, but rewarding the people who have applied and not drawn for a long time is not one.
In most instances, having no point system actually improves overall odds for everyone, including that 20 point holder
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 17, 2023, 08:50:12 AM
This is just nuts. People complaining about how the guy with 20 points can't draw, so let's go to the Idaho system. Really? Let's make the guy who's applied for 20 years have the same odds as the guy who passed hunter ed last week?
Lots of benefits to a system with no points, but rewarding the people who have applied and not drawn for a long time is not one.
So the alternative then is to let the squared points continue to climb on up to 30, 40, or more so the youth who just passed hunters ed are so far behind they never have a realistic chance of drawing? Because boo-hoo I've been applying for 20 years I deserve a tag more than they do?
Post by: Bob33 on January 17, 2023, 08:55:37 AM
With a points system and the average applicant having ten points, an applicant with one point has a 1 in 100,000 odds while an applicant with 20 points has approximate odds of 1 in 250. The “breakeven” point is obviously ten: applicants with fewer than ten points have worse odds, while applicants with more than ten points would have better odds.
Post by: BA Mongor on January 17, 2023, 10:26:41 AM
Post by: Threewolves on January 17, 2023, 10:29:21 AM
We are talking Elk and Deer here, I think the other species are already once in a life time. Except cow moose.
I would be leaning towards luck of the draw every year on everything right after I get drawn on the Moose, Goat, Sheep. Maybe I get to use my 28 points (This year). 28 years is a long freaking time to have people come in behind you with less points and get drawn. Maybe there should just be a line starting with the people with the most points and everyone else can just GET IN LINE. Of course we are way past this.
Why should we care about a kid (and I will add or new hunter) getting in on a special draw, when some one else has been waiting over a quarter of a century! The kid can hunt deer and elk over the counter and earn it just like the guy with 25 points did for 26 years. It will build character. Think about it this way, you would not have so many people with over 20 points, if people with less points were not drawn. Form a line, get in line. Lets go with the highest # of points alphabetically, my last name starts with A.
Maybe we should be allowed to "Grandfather the points to our grandkids, the way it is going my son would not draw a hunt either. AS is it's a pyramid scheme and you got to play to win, eventually..... Think how much the state could make by keeping this one going with half the allotment of tags AND having another one with the luck of the draw every year.
I usually just read these kinds of posts, decided to chime in. No real need to agree or disagree with me, I am running out of time, there are only so many sunsets left.
Post by: vandeman17 on January 17, 2023, 10:36:23 AM
Post by: idahohuntr on January 17, 2023, 10:48:48 AM
Post by: vandeman17 on January 17, 2023, 10:52:53 AM
I don't see (in any system) where 2 minutes and a few $$, once a year, entitles anyone to anything. Applying for 25 years in a row...great...sounds like you've had 25 chances to draw. I say that as someone who has been applying in many states for more than 25 years...and I'd be happy to give up all my points if states dropped their ponzi schemes.
:yeah: x1000. I would give up all my points tomorrow if they went to random draw. I would be even more happy if they added in that you can only apply for deer/elk or OIL in a given year and not both. Super happy if they made you front the money for OIL too but that isn't required :chuckle:
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 11:04:35 AM
This is just nuts. People complaining about how the guy with 20 points can't draw, so let's go to the Idaho system. Really? Let's make the guy who's applied for 20 years have the same odds as the guy who passed hunter ed last week?
Lots of benefits to a system with no points, but rewarding the people who have applied and not drawn for a long time is not one.
Yep exactly what we’re saying! because what you’re not taking into consideration is the guy with 20 points goes deeper and deeper down the point creep hole. His odds now are 1% and immediately go to 3-4% with a system like Idaho! The point is you are not getting rewarded right now for having more points and that is the problem. If we were this wouldn’t even be a discussion.
As some have said guys with 20 or more points in Wa may never draw. With a system like Idaho which you have to choose one species instead of our stupid diluted multiple choice system increases your odds from jump! and most draw every 3-5 yards on average or sooner in some units. Not to mention if you draw one your not eligible for that species the next year taking more people out of the pool further increasing your odds. So yeah that’s exactly what we’re talking about. Also in WA there are more people coming in with 0-1 point than there are the amount your max point is squared so every year there is a better chance one with no points will out draw you. So where again is the preference for the 20 year guy?
This mentality is why it will never change here in WA. Guys would rather sit with all their choices and crappy odds instead of doing the math cause more choices makes one feel they have a better chance when in reality the more choices dilutes the system for all.
I’ve drawn other states with 1-4 points or 0 in Some with no points and in Wa 7-18 points and never drawn an oil so there you go for comparison.
Post by: High Climber on January 17, 2023, 11:24:33 AM
I’m not endorsing a point system here, but I did the math on the Tucannon Quality Archery elk tag. In 2021:This is just nuts. People complaining about how the guy with 20 points can't draw, so let's go to the Idaho system. Really? Let's make the guy who's applied for 20 years have the same odds as the guy who passed hunter ed last week?
Lots of benefits to a system with no points, but rewarding the people who have applied and not drawn for a long time is not one.
Yep exactly what we’re saying! because what you’re not taking into consideration is the guy with 20 points goes deeper and deeper down the point creep hole. His odds now are 1% and immediately go to 3-4% with a system like Idaho! The point is you are not getting rewarded right now for having more points and that is the problem. If we were this wouldn’t even be a discussion.
As some have said guys with 20 or more points in Wa may never draw. With a system like Idaho which you have to choose one species instead of our stupid diluted multiple choice system increases your odds from jump! and most draw every 3-5 yards on average or sooner in some units. Not to mention if you draw one your not eligible for that species the next year taking more people out of the pool further increasing your odds. So yeah that’s exactly what we’re talking about. Also in WA there are more people coming in with 0-1 point than there are the amount your max point is squared so every year there is a better chance one with no points will out draw you. So where again is the preference for the 20 year guy?
This mentality is why it will never change here in WA. Guys would rather sit with all their choices and crappy odds instead of doing the math cause more choices makes one feel they have a better chance when in reality the more choices dilutes the system for all.
I’ve drawn other states with 1-4 points or 0 in Some with no points and in Wa 7-18 points and never drawn an oil so there you go for comparison.
A guy with 20 points had 3.9% chance at a tag
If it was totally random, each person would have .86%
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 17, 2023, 11:56:24 AM
Yep exactly what we’re saying! because what you’re not taking into consideration is the guy with 20 points goes deeper and deeper down the point creep hole. His odds now are 1% and immediately go to 3-4% with a system like Idaho!
Can you explain your math?
Post by: baker5150 on January 17, 2023, 12:09:12 PM
I don't see (in any system) where 2 minutes and a few $$, once a year, entitles anyone to anything. Applying for 25 years in a row...great...sounds like you've had 25 chances to draw. I say that as someone who has been applying in many states for more than 25 years...and I'd be happy to give up all my points if states dropped their ponzi schemes.
Guys put value to the points they receive. They paid for them, and built them up over time, so they become inherently valued.
It's human nature to feel like a guys time and money are worth something, hence the entitlement.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 12:18:16 PM
1. Give out more tags
2. Have less people in the draw
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2023, 12:19:48 PM
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 12:24:21 PM
If there were a way to fix it, some states would have done it. The best thing WDFW could do is actually manage the resource so we aren't all arguing over 1 tag.
Post by: huntnphool on January 17, 2023, 12:25:13 PM
Points aren't to reward people, they are designed to keep them playing the game every year. Given the bleak tag numbers, how many people would stop applying if there were no points and just a random draw? Having X points drives people to keep playing year after year because they have sunk costs and are lead to believe they are close to drawing because they are due.
If there were no points, but you still had to apply to get the tags you want, people would apply.
Much like Idaho. ;)
Post by: trophyhunt on January 17, 2023, 12:26:22 PM
If they go to a system where tags go to the highest point holder, it's really over. Nobody with under 10 points would ever draw a quality tag until all the guys over 30 die.I agree with that last part!!! If they'd pull their heads out of their butts and get rid of all anti's on the board, we'd have plenty of resources (animals).
If there were a way to fix it, some states would have done it. The best thing WDFW could do is actually manage the resource so we aren't all arguing over 1 tag.
Post by: huntnphool on January 17, 2023, 12:32:29 PM
If there were a way to fix it, some states would have done it.
I gave you a way to fix Washington’s ;)
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 12:32:48 PM
Points aren't to reward people, they are designed to keep them playing the game every year. Given the bleak tag numbers, how many people would stop applying if there were no points and just a random draw? Having X points drives people to keep playing year after year because they have sunk costs and are lead to believe they are close to drawing because they are due.
If there were no points, but you still had to apply to get the tags you want, people would apply.
Much like Idaho. ;)
True, but look how many people buy ghost points. Every year they can't hunt or don't want to hunt for whatever reason, they wouldn't apply.
Post by: huntnphool on January 17, 2023, 12:35:32 PM
Points aren't to reward people, they are designed to keep them playing the game every year. Given the bleak tag numbers, how many people would stop applying if there were no points and just a random draw? Having X points drives people to keep playing year after year because they have sunk costs and are lead to believe they are close to drawing because they are due.
If there were no points, but you still had to apply to get the tags you want, people would apply.
Much like Idaho. ;)
True, but look how many people buy ghost points. Every year they can't hunt or don't want to hunt for whatever reason, they wouldn't apply.
I buy ghost points because I don’t want to double up on tags. Now that I can turn one back in, it’s not so much a big deal.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 12:41:01 PM
I don't think WDFW publishes it, but states that do have massive numbers in that category.
On the flip side, a guy could argue that going random would have some people enter the game that didn't play because they entered the game late or drew in the last few years and realize they won't draw again.
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 17, 2023, 12:51:13 PM
Points aren't to reward people, they are designed to keep them playing the game every year. Given the bleak tag numbers, how many people would stop applying if there were no points and just a random draw? Having X points drives people to keep playing year after year because they have sunk costs and are lead to believe they are close to drawing because they are due.
If there were no points, but you still had to apply to get the tags you want, people would apply.
Much like Idaho. ;)
Not everyone. I don't apply every year in ID and NM. But I won't miss a year in the States where I have points.
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 01:50:07 PM
Yep exactly what we’re saying! because what you’re not taking into consideration is the guy with 20 points goes deeper and deeper down the point creep hole. His odds now are 1% and immediately go to 3-4% with a system like Idaho!
Can you explain your math?
Short answer is it’s not my math
Long answer is I have seen the spread sheet made by a member here and it makes sense when you see it. He hasn’t been active for awhile but is well respected here and active in state hunting groups and WA season setting so he has a good grasp of the numbers used. If I can talk him into it I’ll see if he will post but the last time this came up I was asked the same thing and he didn’t wish to participate in the discussion.
He did the math on most of the tags given in both states and a side by side comparison with draw odds based on the amount of people applying at the time which was about 5 yerars ago. Every category at the time increases odds from 1 or less % to 3-4 and I think there may have been some categories close or over 5. I left that out and went with the lower ones I recall seeing. So although not my spreadsheets it isn’t something I pulled out of my @$$ 😉 they may be out dated with time but the point is that their system rewards you more and frequently than WA does. And if you don’t believe in this because you can’t see the math just listen to those who actually put in to each state and they are telling you they draw Idaho special tags at a higher rate than WA so the proof is clear there. I prefer their system from my experience.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 01:56:40 PM
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
Post by: KNOPHISH on January 17, 2023, 01:57:09 PM
Post by: baker5150 on January 17, 2023, 02:01:02 PM
Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?
Post by: baker5150 on January 17, 2023, 02:04:24 PM
You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
This supports the argument for a set time ban from applying after you draw. I think Montana has this for some hunts, a 7 year wait IIRC.
Odds go up for those who haven't drawn yet.
20 tags go out, the next year would have 20 less applicants, then 40, then 60 etc. etc.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 02:07:21 PM
What do you guys think would happen if they limited us to only 1 hunt choice in each category?
Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?
It's been proposed on here, but some people prefer having the ability to apply for everything.
It would increase your odds of drawing the tag you apply for but would obviously decrease your ability to draw all the other tags you couldn't apply for.
This is my preferred "fix" as it would give people a better chance at drawing their first preference. I would actually propose you can only submit one special application total, pick what you really want and then get better odds at actually drawing it.
Very much revenue negative for WDFW though, so I'm not holding my breath.
Post by: Rainier10 on January 17, 2023, 02:09:56 PM
So after the first year instead of 3480 people applying for entiat rifle there would only be 3460. By year 7 it would be 3340 and hold steady there forever because each year after that you would be losing 20 but 20 more would then be eligible again after waiting there 7 years.You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
This supports the argument for a set time ban from applying after you draw. I think Montana has this for some hunts, a 7 year wait IIRC.
Odds go up for those who haven't drawn yet.
20 tags go out, the next year would have 20 less applicants, then 40, then 60 etc. etc.
Post by: vandeman17 on January 17, 2023, 02:13:19 PM
https://www.gohunt.com/content/insider/tips/point-creep---what-is-it-and-learn-how-it-could-impact-you
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 02:17:48 PM
So after the first year instead of 3480 people applying for entiat rifle there would only be 3460. By year 7 it would be 3340 and hold steady there forever because each year after that you would be losing 20 but 20 more would then be eligible again after waiting there 7 years.You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
This supports the argument for a set time ban from applying after you draw. I think Montana has this for some hunts, a 7 year wait IIRC.
Odds go up for those who haven't drawn yet.
20 tags go out, the next year would have 20 less applicants, then 40, then 60 etc. etc.
It's even worse than that as there are new hunters entering the draw every year and in many units the tag numbers are on the decline.
Post by: nwmein199 on January 17, 2023, 02:18:44 PM
You do feel like your points are worth something after many years or decades, they should be. Now do I feel entitled, no, but I sure wish the points meant more and higher point holders drew more. Sure, it's gets under my skin when someone under X amount of points draws when guys with 20+ points don't even come close, that is not how it should work in my opinion. I know, I know, the guys with massive points DO have a better chance, but it should be more than 1.2% compared to .01%. I've said it before, I think a certain % of tags should only go to the highest point holders, even when I have zero I'll think the same. For the record, I'd like this point system to go away, no more points given out and when you go to zero, it's done.
If WA tag system really bugs you that much, you should only apply for tags in Colorado and Arizona. There you wont have to deal with the WDFW BS of tags being given to people who are not the top point holders.
Randy Newberg makes a great point about this often in his podcasts....hunter numbers are already decreasing and that is not a good thing for us hunters. By having a preference points system, it prevents new hunters from entering the tag application game as it is impossible to draw tags unless you started applying the first year they were offered in that state. Here in WA, a new hunter has a chance at the best tags in the state from day 1 so gives them a little more incentive to join the hunting community.
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 02:28:04 PM
...just listen to those who actually put in to each state and they are telling you they draw Idaho special tags at a higher rate than WA so the proof is clear there. I prefer their system from my experience.
I was thinking you would say that...that's just straight up apples to oranges, and certainly not proof. Being able to draw a good tag in Idaho versus WA could be attributable to lots of factors, like (i) how many tags were available for the hunt you wanted, and (ii) how many people in WA had more points than you did. An individual's anecdotal experience doesn't equate to math.
:chuckle:
It’s not hard to understand that if you have only 1 choice per species it increases odds for those putting in because it excludes some that pick a different species and that my friend is apples to apples. You might need math for that but I do not :hello:
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 02:38:18 PM
There are only two ways to increase odds for everyone that applies:
1. Give out more tags
2. Have less people in the draw
Number 2 is what I would be in favor of. Either this proposal by Huntnphool or a combo between this and how it is done in Idaho that limits all these choices we currently have. Having several choices for each animal dilutes the pool and ultimately gives each person lower odds of drawing.
What do you guys think would happen if they limited us to only 1 hunt choice in each category?
Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?
It's been proposed on here, but some people prefer having the ability to apply for everything.
It would increase your odds of drawing the tag you apply for but would obviously decrease your ability to draw all the other tags you couldn't apply for.
This is my preferred "fix" as it would give people a better chance at drawing their first preference. I would actually propose you can only submit one special application total, pick what you really want and then get better odds at actually drawing it.
Very much revenue negative for WDFW though, so I'm not holding my breath.
@Wacousehunter
Stein and I are saying the same thing here although Stein much more eloquent than me! :chuckle:
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 02:48:40 PM
What do you guys think would happen if they limited us to only 1 hunt choice in each category?
Would it help, or just shift the odds around some?
It's been proposed on here, but some people prefer having the ability to apply for everything.
It would increase your odds of drawing the tag you apply for but would obviously decrease your ability to draw all the other tags you couldn't apply for.
This is my preferred "fix" as it would give people a better chance at drawing their first preference. I would actually propose you can only submit one special application total, pick what you really want and then get better odds at actually drawing it.
Very much revenue negative for WDFW though, so I'm not holding my breath.
So Stein, would you be in favor of this if it meant a higher permit fee per app to make up for those lost by the limitation? I would personally because I’m currently going to spend that money on several crappy odds and would gladly put them all together for one at greater odds. This is what it would take for the State to even consider it because we all know they don’t give up revenue.
Again another problem is selling this to our hunting brothers and sisters. They would not be in favor of an increase even though they are spending the same on several at lower odds of drawing.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 03:16:57 PM
That said, sure, I'd rather pay more for a better chance.
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 03:22:47 PM
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 03:33:13 PM
So, full disclaimer here, I haven't bought a big game license in WA for several years now.
That said, sure, I'd rather pay more for a better chance.
👍🏼
Post by: buglebrush on January 17, 2023, 04:15:39 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 04:22:44 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on January 17, 2023, 04:38:07 PM
Post by: buglebrush on January 17, 2023, 04:45:14 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
Post by: Bullkllr on January 17, 2023, 05:24:12 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 05:27:11 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 05:29:05 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?
Post by: Bullkllr on January 17, 2023, 05:39:37 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?
True. That's what they told us hunters wanted when they split the species categories.
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 05:42:03 PM
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 05:44:57 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?
No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).
Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit. If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%. Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.
Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 17, 2023, 06:01:24 PM
...just listen to those who actually put in to each state and they are telling you they draw Idaho special tags at a higher rate than WA so the proof is clear there. I prefer their system from my experience.
I was thinking you would say that...that's just straight up apples to oranges, and certainly not proof. Being able to draw a good tag in Idaho versus WA could be attributable to lots of factors, like (i) how many tags were available for the hunt you wanted, and (ii) how many people in WA had more points than you did. An individual's anecdotal experience doesn't equate to math.
:chuckle:
It’s not hard to understand that if you have only 1 choice per species it increases odds for those putting in because it excludes some that pick a different species and that my friend is apples to apples. You might need math for that but I do not :hello:
Oh, I get it...limiting the choices increases average overall odds for a given tag. But junking the WA points system and limiting the choices doesn't increase the odds for the guy with 20 points in WA and 400 names in the hat. And add in the 20 points he gives up for all the other species as well, and his odds of drawing an OIL tag goes WAY down. Sorry man, but there's still math involved.
Post by: Igor on January 17, 2023, 06:03:21 PM
There is some interesting math going on in this thread...................
Post by: buglebrush on January 17, 2023, 06:09:19 PM
That isn't how the math works. 10,% odds three times isn't 30% odds.Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?
No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).
Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit. If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%. Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.
Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.
Post by: buglebrush on January 17, 2023, 06:15:42 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.
The number of people is irrelevant. It's the number of applications that determines odds. If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag. It also makes your existing points way more valuable. WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 06:32:53 PM
That isn't how the math works. 10,% odds three times isn't 30% odds.Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
It would for sure cut the odds for each individual permit draw. It would make people put in for permits they really want.
But I apply for everything, and as many choices as allowed on each application. So do many others. Limiting my choices and number of application, might decrease my odds of drawing a special permit. Right?
No, it will increase your odds of drawing the permit you apply for and decrease the odds of the permits you can no longer apply for (go to 0%).
Think of it like this, if you apply for 10 permits with a 1% chance, you have a 10% chance of drawing A permit. If you change the system so you can only apply for one permit, the odds would go to 10%. Same odds, but you get to direct those odds to the permit you most want.
Obviously a great oversimplification, but the idea would be that you get a better chance at your favorite permit and pay for it by giving up your chances at all the other permits.
That's why I said it's an oversimplification, I should have been more clear on the numbers maybe. It's a complex system and you have no idea who would apply for what, thus you can't calculate what the odds would be. If you only allow everyone to apply for one special permit, the odds of drawing any of the permits would go up. The overall system odds wouldn't change, assuming same number of tags and people.
There is no way to calculate what your odds would be, so I just pulled some numbers out of thin air to use as an example.
For your example, if you put in for three tags and have 10% for each, the probability of drawing at least one is 27%. It gets a bit cumbersome for a dozen numbers or however many unique permit categories you can apply for these days.
Post by: Alan K on January 17, 2023, 06:49:12 PM
The reality is any decent tag, no matter the system, will have odds so long you're unlikely to draw in your lifetime.
I'll take smaller odds in all categories versus still low odds on one and zero chance on all the rest, take my animals during the general season every year, and trophy hunt out of state.
One way to reduce applications would be to bump the app fee up to $25/each... :peep:
Post by: sagerat on January 17, 2023, 06:55:16 PM
I've said for years, add 1 rut hunt tag for every weapon, for every species, in every GMU they inhabit. Virtually zero impact on the resource, but would spread applicants out significantly and relieve some pressure on the most sought after hunts. Could also add the same, but with late/migration hunts in place of rut.
The reality is any decent tag, no matter the system, will have odds so long you're unlikely to draw in your lifetime.
I'll take smaller odds in all categories versus still low odds on one and zero chance on all the rest, take my animals during the general season every year, and trophy hunt out of state.
One way to reduce applications would be to bump the app fee up to $25/each... :peep:
I’m sure it’s coming and it won’t stop at $25. The general season we all kill our animals on will likely be on the chopping block as well. The fun is just beginning here, it’s pretty depressing when you’re trying to raise your kids to love it…
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 06:59:25 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.
The number of people is irrelevant. It's the number of applications that determines odds. If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag. It also makes your existing points way more valuable. WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system.
This! :yeah: we finally have a winner that I think explained it so everyone can understand!!! :whoo: :whoo:
As we have said if the state charged the same amount for one choice as it currently does for multiple choices it makes the same amount. For the hunter you get better odds for your top choice for the same price as several lower chance draws.
Post by: sagerat on January 17, 2023, 07:20:03 PM
Limiting the number of applications a person can submit, or number of choices per application, would do absolutely nothing to improve overall odds of drawing a special permit. The number of people is still the same, and the number of permits. So odds would stay the same. As someone else said, the way to improve odds is to decrease the number of people applying, or increase the number of permits.
This is absolutely untrue. It's not about the number of people, but the number of applications.
How is it untrue? Same number of people, same number of permits, equals the exact same overall odds as before. Sure certain people may end up with better odds depending on how they applied previously, and then how they apply after the change. But overall odds are still the same.
The number of people is irrelevant. It's the number of applications that determines odds. If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag. It also makes your existing points way more valuable. WDFW won't do it because the state gets so much money scamming people with the current system.
This! :yeah: we finally have a winner that I think explained it so everyone can understand!!! :whoo: :whoo:
As we have said if the state charged the same amount for one choice as it currently does for multiple choices it makes the same amount. For the hunter you get better odds for your top choice for the same price as several lower chance draws.
:yeah: This theory sounds logical and the odds would definitely improve. The problem is a lot of guys would just be done and not contribute any longer. Draw odds would improve but what would WDFW do when the income starts to slip? Cater more to the beaver lovers I suppose.
Post by: Mfowl on January 17, 2023, 07:28:34 PM
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 17, 2023, 07:34:00 PM
If you limit each person to a single application every year, the total number of applications goes way down which drastically improves your odds of drawing a tag.
It drastically improves your odds of drawing a single, particular tag, but not just drawing a tag. Odds of drawing "a" tag stay the same...same number of applicants and same number of tags across the whole system. Put another way, odds of drawing the Entiat rifle tag (assuming that's your one choice) goes up. Odds of drawing a primo tag altogether (quality deer, elk, OIL) will more or less stay the same.
It also makes your existing points way more valuable.
True for that one particular tag you're after. But not true for every other species for which you're no longer accruing BP's. You're falling behind in those other draws, assuming you even get to keep your points at all.
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 07:58:47 PM
I'm not necessarily against limiting the number of applications, or number of choices we have on each application. I'm just saying it's not the magic solution to improving draw odds for everyone. If draw odds somehow become better for certain people, then odds also must get worse for other people.
Post by: Bob33 on January 17, 2023, 08:41:12 PM
https://cowboystatedaily.com/2023/01/17/bill-would-remove-75-25-preference-point-system-for-big-5-trophy-game-species/
Post by: buglebrush on January 17, 2023, 09:19:45 PM
Post by: M_ray on January 17, 2023, 09:30:02 PM
It's the number of people applying that affects the odds, not the number of applications. Unless you're a person who only applies for one thing, instead of every possible permit that's available to you.
I'm not necessarily against limiting the number of applications, or number of choices we have on each application. I'm just saying it's not the magic solution to improving draw odds for everyone. If draw odds somehow become better for certain people, then odds also must get worse for other people.
🤦🏻♂️
Post by: bobcat on January 17, 2023, 09:37:30 PM
As to the deer and elk, again, eliminate the general season, and make it all draw only. That's the best solution to the failing point system when it comes to deer and elk.
Post by: idahohuntr on January 17, 2023, 09:38:07 PM
One phone call to Lorna should do it...just explain that points systems systemically discriminate against new hunters which disproportionately impacts females, minorities, and youth hunters...and the beneficiaries are mostly older white males who've got a long tradition of hunting.
I'm not joking...I seriously think a half-a$$ ambitious person or group could get a 5-4 vote to end points in WA.
Post by: Stein on January 17, 2023, 09:44:44 PM
Post by: huntnphool on January 17, 2023, 11:46:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/owQfk7Yl.png)
There is some interesting math going on in this thread...................
:chuckle:
Post by: huntnphool on January 17, 2023, 11:52:58 PM
I say we go full tilt. Get rid of points in 5 years, until then you can sell or gift points to anyone.
Again…
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
:rolleyes:
Post by: trophyhunt on January 18, 2023, 05:07:00 AM
Post by: vandeman17 on January 18, 2023, 09:31:38 AM
I give up trying to explain the math, and it's sad because if people would actually understand what the current system is doing they'd be appalled! I'm curious how many of you have Gohunt? Do you know the actual odds in Washington? Even for those with higher than average points? They are absolutely abysmal!
Agreed and that has been my point all along with regard to the higher end tag. When the difference between 1 point and 20 points means you have a .1% chance at 1 point and 1% at 20, we need to examine our mentality that points are REALLY giving us better odds when both scenarios mean that you are at worst going to not get drawn 99 times out of 100.
Post by: hunter399 on January 18, 2023, 09:35:18 AM
As far as going full permit only and dropping the regular season, keep that on the east side please, we are fine on the west.I'm not sure what. East side season your referring too.
You don't want my two cents. :chuckle:
Things that need to go!
Multiseason tags gone statewide.
All doe/ cow tags-OTC/permit gone statewide.
Including moose cow tags.
Choose which side of state you hunt deer.
GMU with the lowest harvest rates for deer/elk, permit hunt only/ or APR applied.
1 black bear can only be harvested per year,East side of the mountains.
Maybe I'll write our "NEW" Commission and ask for these.
Since your so worried about the West.
What's the worst they could say is no.
Our new Commission is all about polical view,and "conservation".
What ever that definition of conservation is today.
Oh ya my list is a lot longer of things to ask for.
That just the tip of the berg.
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 18, 2023, 10:13:50 AM
In a normally functioning western hunting state all of these things would be a no-brainer. In WA, I'm not so sure anymore. The ability to go buy your license at the store and have a deer camp with your family and friends every year just might be the last good thing about this state. When we voluntarily give that up only to realize it didn't make a bit of difference and now we've gone full-on California style, it may be too late to get any of it back... :dunno: :twocents:
Post by: vandeman17 on January 18, 2023, 10:22:49 AM
All I can say is be careful what you wish for. When we ask for our seasons to be shortened, when we ask for our system to go to controlled tags only where they get to decide what the quota is (see current quality elk tag #'s), when we ask for our opportunities to be lessened because we're willing to fall on the sword for the thing we love, and then it has no effect because they still refuse to manage our resource in a responsible manner then what?
In a normally functioning western hunting state all of these things would be a no-brainer. In WA, I'm not so sure anymore. The ability to go buy your license at the store and have a deer camp with your family and friends every year just might be the last good thing about this state. When we voluntarily give that up only to realize it didn't make a bit of difference and now we've gone full-on California style, it may be too late to get any of it back... :dunno: :twocents:
I agree that I don't like the idea of going to draw only except for MAYBE in a few units that could really benefit from a few years of minimal harvest. I still like the idea of getting rid of points and also limiting a person to applying for either deer/elk or OIL each year.
Post by: Bob33 on January 18, 2023, 11:28:55 AM
The second change has been mentioned frequently and that’s the internet, and especially the number of organizations like Huntin’ Fool that have benefitted from hunter demand for trophy animals and facilitated application processes in multiple states.
Another change in Washington has been the loss of upland bird and small game hunting opportunities. We hunted a lot of pheasants and chukar growing up; those opportunities are greatly diminished now. I can recall hunting rabbits (hares) on San Juan island as a youth; it was great fun and memorable. Band tailed pigeons are another specie we hunted as a youth that is no longer really viable. Big game has supplanted many of those opportunities which has increased hunter demand for permits.
Add in predation, reduced public land opportunities, and increased restrictions and fees for private land access and we have a tough road ahead.
Post by: pickardjw on January 18, 2023, 11:52:55 AM
As far as going full permit only and dropping the regular season, keep that on the east side please, we are fine on the west.I'm not sure what. East side season your referring too.
You don't want my two cents. :chuckle:
Things that need to go!
Multiseason tags gone statewide.
All doe/ cow tags-OTC/permit gone statewide.
Including moose cow tags.
Choose which side of state you hunt deer.
GMU with the lowest harvest rates for deer/elk, permit hunt only/ or APR applied.
1 black bear can only be harvested per year,East side of the mountains.
Maybe I'll write our "NEW" Commission and ask for these.
Since your so worried about the West.
What's the worst they could say is no.
Our new Commission is all about polical view,and "conservation".
What ever that definition of conservation is today.
Oh ya my list is a lot longer of things to ask for.
That just the tip of the berg.
Why only one black bear east of the cascades?
Post by: Mfowl on January 18, 2023, 12:04:43 PM
Post by: hunter399 on January 18, 2023, 12:35:07 PM
Oh you know just cause it's the East side. :chuckle: :chuckle:As far as going full permit only and dropping the regular season, keep that on the east side please, we are fine on the west.I'm not sure what. East side season your referring too.
You don't want my two cents. :chuckle:
Things that need to go!
Multiseason tags gone statewide.
All doe/ cow tags-OTC/permit gone statewide.
Including moose cow tags.
Choose which side of state you hunt deer.
GMU with the lowest harvest rates for deer/elk, permit hunt only/ or APR applied.
1 black bear can only be harvested per year,East side of the mountains.
Maybe I'll write our "NEW" Commission and ask for these.
Since your so worried about the West.
What's the worst they could say is no.
Our new Commission is all about polical view,and "conservation".
What ever that definition of conservation is today.
Oh ya my list is a lot longer of things to ask for.
That just the tip of the berg.
Why only one black bear east of the cascades?
Don't judge me now,I did buy a second tag myself last year.
Its just that's not my side of the state mentality. :chuckle:
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on January 25, 2023, 03:56:40 PM
You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.Yes you can. In Idaho you must choose either sheep or goat or moose or deer, elk and antelope. On top of that decision you really only have 1 choice. So instead of each person applying in 4 ram hunts, 4 goat hunts, 4 bull moose hunts, 4 cow moose hunts, 12 deer hunts and 12 elk hunts you have a person at most applying for 1 deer, 1 elk and 1 antelope hunt. Most people don’t even apply for sheep, goat or moose and I realistically as a resident have better odds of drawing a sheep tag each year than any of the top 10 mule deer or elk hunts and any rifle antelope hunt
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: MtnMuley on January 25, 2023, 05:11:13 PM
Another change in Washington has been the loss of upland bird and small game hunting opportunities. We hunted a lot of pheasants and chukar growing up; those opportunities are greatly diminished now.
Where has been the loss of these opportunities? Some of the best chukar and small game hunting that I've ever seen here is happening here right now.
Post by: Bob33 on January 25, 2023, 05:14:28 PM
That's good to hear. We used to hunt upload birds (primarily pheasants) near Kittitas and also Quincy and usually filled our limits. I haven't seen birds there is many years. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places.Another change in Washington has been the loss of upland bird and small game hunting opportunities. We hunted a lot of pheasants and chukar growing up; those opportunities are greatly diminished now.
Where has been the loss of these opportunities? Some of the best chukar and small game hunting that I've ever seen here is happening here right now.
Post by: MtnMuley on January 25, 2023, 05:22:16 PM
That's good to hear. We used to hunt upload birds (primarily pheasants) near Kittitas and also Quincy and usually filled our limits. I haven't seen birds there is many years. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places.Another change in Washington has been the loss of upland bird and small game hunting opportunities. We hunted a lot of pheasants and chukar growing up; those opportunities are greatly diminished now.
Where has been the loss of these opportunities? Some of the best chukar and small game hunting that I've ever seen here is happening here right now.
I will agree that pheasants are down in most all areas I know. I blame that on habitat loss. Removing lots of old fences in the Palouse country that would grab those tumble weeds for cover.
Post by: time2hunt on January 25, 2023, 05:54:51 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Stein on January 25, 2023, 08:22:41 PM
You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.Yes you can. In Idaho you must choose either sheep or goat or moose or deer, elk and antelope. On top of that decision you really only have 1 choice. So instead of each person applying in 4 ram hunts, 4 goat hunts, 4 bull moose hunts, 4 cow moose hunts, 12 deer hunts and 12 elk hunts you have a person at most applying for 1 deer, 1 elk and 1 antelope hunt. Most people don’t even apply for sheep, goat or moose and I realistically as a resident have better odds of drawing a sheep tag each year than any of the top 10 mule deer or elk hunts and any rifle antelope hunt
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You didn't increase their overall odds, you just moved them. In ID, you have to make the choice as you mentioned, so the odds of drawing are zero for all the other categories since you can't apply.
10 tags, 100 guys, odds are odds no matter how you design the system. Overall, the odds of drawing a tag are going to be 10%. If you don't increase tags or decrease guys, you are simply moving odds around.
Post by: buglebrush on January 25, 2023, 09:51:19 PM
You can't increase everyone's odds by changing the application system only. It's a zero sum game there, if my odds go up someone's odds have to go down.Yes you can. In Idaho you must choose either sheep or goat or moose or deer, elk and antelope. On top of that decision you really only have 1 choice. So instead of each person applying in 4 ram hunts, 4 goat hunts, 4 bull moose hunts, 4 cow moose hunts, 12 deer hunts and 12 elk hunts you have a person at most applying for 1 deer, 1 elk and 1 antelope hunt. Most people don’t even apply for sheep, goat or moose and I realistically as a resident have better odds of drawing a sheep tag each year than any of the top 10 mule deer or elk hunts and any rifle antelope hunt
ID odds are better because they have more tags, or more specifically, less people applying for a given tag than WA.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You didn't increase their overall odds, you just moved them. In ID, you have to make the choice as you mentioned, so the odds of drawing are zero for all the other categories since you can't apply.
10 tags, 100 guys, odds are odds no matter how you design the system. Overall, the odds of drawing a tag are going to be 10%. If you don't increase tags or decrease guys, you are simply moving odds around.
This is categorically untrue. Seriously that's not how the math works! If three guys apply with a 10% chance of drawing, the odds of one of them drawing isn't 30%. It's the amount of applications not applicants that determines the odds.
Post by: huntnnw on January 25, 2023, 10:02:33 PM
Post by: buglebrush on January 25, 2023, 10:15:31 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 25, 2023, 10:22:40 PM
Post by: huntnnw on January 25, 2023, 10:52:51 PM
If 10 guys apply with each having 10% odds, the probability that one of them draws a tag is 65.132% not 100%. It gets exponentially worse as you increase the number of applications. A system like Idaho would be an enormous boost to draw odds.
there would be a huge increase in odds for some with ID system.
Post by: Ghost Hunter on January 26, 2023, 06:45:39 AM
If you increase odds for one person the odds decrease for another. You can't change the odds without changing the number of people applying for permits, or changing the number of permits.
:yeah: At least that's what my simple mind comes up with. :dunno:
Post by: Stein on January 26, 2023, 07:14:46 AM
Say there is one elk tag and one deer tag and only you and I apply and we each apply for both tags every year. I have a 50% chance of drawing the deer tag and 50% chance of drawing the elk tag. Same with you. One day we are chatting when I mention I really want to hunt elk next year. Funny, you really want to hunt deer next year! So, we make a deal, I will only apply for elk if you only apply for deer. Perfect, I get a 100% chance of drawing elk and you get a 100% chance of drawing deer. On the flip side, my odds for deer were 0% and your odds for elk were 0%. We made a trade, I gave you my odds for the deer tag in return for you giving me your odds for the elk tag.
In this situation, one could say our odds went up. If you are looking only at the one tag I applied for, they did. If you look at the overall system, nothing changed. It all depends on one's perspective.
The problem with WA is the overall odds are so low that going to this system wouldn't make as noticeable difference as one would hope. Like my previous example, if there are one elk and one deer tag but now there are 1,000 people instead of just the two of us, I have a 0.1% chance of drawing the elk tag under the old system. If you force a choice and assume half will chose deer and half will chose elk, the odds for me drawing my elk tag only increases to 0.2%. Net result, who cares?
When you go to your favorite charity dinner auction, there is a prize table with a can behind each prize to put tickets into. One guy buys 10 tickets and puts them all in one can. Another guy buys 10 tickets and spreads them out to 10 cans. Who is right?
The "best" system could be one where you can do both depending on what you like. If there are 10 permit categories you can apply for all 10, use all 10 applications in one category, or put five in elk and five in moose, whatever you want. Everyone can submit up to 10. State gets the same amount of money and we get all new reasons to be grumpy after the draw. :chuckle:
Post by: High Climber on January 26, 2023, 07:48:17 AM
-consider everyone’s first choice before anyone’s second etc.
-one year? waiting period if you draw deer or elk
-keep bonus points as they are
Post by: huntnnw on January 26, 2023, 08:15:00 AM
If you increase odds for one person the odds decrease for another. You can't change the odds without changing the number of people applying for permits, or changing the number of permits.
:yeah: At least that's what my simple mind comes up with. :dunno:
If we went to a Idaho type system I can’t see a single category where the odds get worse . Problem here is everyone wants to apply for everything with tons of selections per app
Post by: Stein on January 26, 2023, 09:55:34 AM
There have been polls here in the past and there are people that put a value on being able to apply for everything. It isn't wrong or right, they just look at it differently.
For OIL tags in WA, it doesn't matter what they do, the odds will be horrific unless they convince 90%+ of the people to not apply one way or another. It's a Powerball ticket.
In order to boost odds for something, you have to be willing to give something else up. There isn't much to give up unfortunately
Post by: WAcoueshunter on January 26, 2023, 10:15:46 AM
If you increase odds for one person the odds decrease for another. You can't change the odds without changing the number of people applying for permits, or changing the number of permits.
:yeah: At least that's what my simple mind comes up with. :dunno:
If we went to a Idaho type system I can’t see a single category where the odds get worse . Problem here is everyone wants to apply for everything with tons of selections per app
Odds are worse (zero) if you can't apply for the category because you already applied for another category. That's how it averages out. You get better odds for your one category in exchange for zero odds on everything else. I think Bobcat's point is that overall odds stay the same - same number of total tags (all categories) for same number applicants (all categories).
Post by: hunter399 on January 26, 2023, 10:18:28 AM
To buy in for my very tiny tiny tiny chance of the selected being in my account.
Post by: buglebrush on January 26, 2023, 10:23:33 AM
If you increase odds for one person the odds decrease for another. You can't change the odds without changing the number of people applying for permits, or changing the number of permits.
:yeah: At least that's what my simple mind comes up with. :dunno:
If we went to a Idaho type system I can’t see a single category where the odds get worse . Problem here is everyone wants to apply for everything with tons of selections per app
Odds are worse (zero) if you can't apply for the category because you already applied for another category. That's how it averages out. You get better odds for your one category in exchange for zero odds on everything else. I think Bobcat's point is that overall odds stay the same - same number of total tags (all categories) for same number applicants (all categories).
That's his point, but it's wrong. Number of applicants is irrelevant, because it's the number of applications that matter. Math doesn't work like he thinks it does. See my post above about 10 hunters at 10% odds.
Post by: Stein on January 26, 2023, 10:28:15 AM
Long story short, if you want something, you either have to take it from someone or give something else in return.
Post by: Pegasus on January 26, 2023, 12:11:20 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on January 26, 2023, 12:17:27 PM
Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?Haven't heard of anything from shanequa, I'm betting the wdfw is just waiting for a solution, like the hunt comes back as a management hunt or something and peeps can use their points again. I'd complain directly but I only have one point, it does seem that it would be a legal mess if someone smart went after wdfw and had all the point holders on their side.
Post by: Bob33 on January 26, 2023, 12:20:36 PM
I have Youth Moose points. Maybe I'll be 15 again some day.Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?Haven't heard of anything from shanequa, I'm betting the wdfw is just waiting for a solution, like the hunt comes back as a management hunt or something and peeps can use their points again. I'd complain directly but I only have one point, it does seem that it would be a legal mess if someone smart went after wdfw and had all the point holders on their side.
Post by: hughjorgan on January 26, 2023, 12:24:02 PM
Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?
Why should they refund your money or allow you to switch your points? It is a LOTTERY, you pay to play once a year. If you don’t draw no one is hollering at the WDFW to refund their purchase. You played the lottery and lost, it’s time to move on. Bonus points are a scam that sinks your hooks into you with the false hope that some how you have substantially better odds of winning a draw(LOTTERY).
Post by: Pegasus on January 26, 2023, 12:43:30 PM
Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?
Why should they refund your money or allow you to switch your points? It is a LOTTERY, you pay to play once a year. If you don’t draw no one is hollering at the WDFW to refund their purchase. You played the lottery and lost, it’s time to move on. Bonus points are a scam that sinks your hooks into you with the false hope that some how you have substantially better odds of winning a draw(LOTTERY).
Actually I used the points option and thus did not lose any drawing. The WDFW created the system that allowed the accumulation of points for future drawings that are now nonexistent for spring bear. They created the system, not me. Technically it is not a lottery as online lottery purchases are illegal in Washington. That is why you can't purchase their raffle tickets online.
Post by: Stein on January 26, 2023, 02:12:03 PM
Post by: hughjorgan on January 26, 2023, 02:12:55 PM
Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?
Why should they refund your money or allow you to switch your points? It is a LOTTERY, you pay to play once a year. If you don’t draw no one is hollering at the WDFW to refund their purchase. You played the lottery and lost, it’s time to move on. Bonus points are a scam that sinks your hooks into you with the false hope that some how you have substantially better odds of winning a draw(LOTTERY).
Actually I used the points option and thus did not lose any drawing. The WDFW created the system that allowed the accumulation of points for future drawings that are now nonexistent for spring bear. They created the system, not me. Technically it is not a lottery as online lottery purchases are illegal in Washington. That is why you can't purchase their raffle tickets online.
You still played the draw and by their rules; it’s the chance you take whether you buy a point or enter the draw. It seems bonus points make people have a sense of entitlement.
Post by: Pegasus on January 26, 2023, 02:40:59 PM
Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?
Why should they refund your money or allow you to switch your points? It is a LOTTERY, you pay to play once a year. If you don’t draw no one is hollering at the WDFW to refund their purchase. You played the lottery and lost, it’s time to move on. Bonus points are a scam that sinks your hooks into you with the false hope that some how you have substantially better odds of winning a draw(LOTTERY).
Actually I used the points option and thus did not lose any drawing. The WDFW created the system that allowed the accumulation of points for future drawings that are now nonexistent for spring bear. They created the system, not me. Technically it is not a lottery as online lottery purchases are illegal in Washington. That is why you can't purchase their raffle tickets online.
You still played the draw and by their rules; it’s the chance you take whether you buy a point or enter the draw. It seems bonus points make people have a sense of entitlement.
We are entitled according to the WDFW which allowed point accumulations without participating in the drawing. The reason they allowed point accumulations without participating in the drawing was to extract more money from the hunting population. If they had run the permit process without allowing the point accumulation for non-participants in the drawing they would have received a lot less money in their coffers. It was purely a monetary decision on the part of the WDFW to allow point accumulation for future years. Killing the spring bear hunt by the liberals has monetary consequences. I will put in a call to Phelony at the WDFW to see if they are going to refund the money or allow the points to be transferred to another critter.
Post by: bobcat on January 26, 2023, 02:48:03 PM
Post by: Bob33 on January 26, 2023, 02:51:51 PM
Post by: idahohuntr on January 26, 2023, 03:02:18 PM
The points won't be, and shouldn't be, transferable to another species. That's just ridiculous. It wouldn't be fair to those who don't have bear points. And it's simply a bad precedent to set. What they need to do is to go back to issuing spring bear permits. They're losing a lot of money by not doing so. I've got ten points and I'm ready to use them. I suppose the other possibility if they want to go back to selling bear points is to make the general bear season a permit only season. :o (I bet they've thought of it)Agreed.
Any proposal - no matter how well meaning - to allow any kind of transfer/sale/gift/redistribution of any points is just plain bad.
Post by: Pegasus on January 26, 2023, 03:31:38 PM
The points won't be, and shouldn't be, transferable to another species. That's just ridiculous. It wouldn't be fair to those who don't have bear points. And it's simply a bad precedent to set. What they need to do is to go back to issuing spring bear permits. They're losing a lot of money by not doing so. I've got ten points and I'm ready to use them. I suppose the other possibility if they want to go back to selling bear points is to make the general bear season a permit only season. :o (I bet they've thought of it)
I doubt they would transfer the points to another critter(would not cost the WDFW anything) but they could easily refund the money we spent to accumulate the points for future years when we opted out of the drawings while following their rules.
Post by: GOcougsHunter on January 26, 2023, 03:58:32 PM
Really great point, actually. And to add more fuel on this fire and has been pointed out in lots of other posts.. Conflict Goat, MasterHunter Moose, and others that the categories just disappeared and are no longer in points total in WildID This is an arguable defect in the Washington system that hasn't been addressed (nor will be probably) I really don't have an answer except that in the old draws in the 90's and 2000's there was a significantly better chance at pulling a cool tag as there were significantly fewer categories and lots of folks used their draws for cow/doe permits and such. Cleaned out the points much faster.Has anyone heard what they plan to do with your preference points for spring bear? Will they refund the money or allow them to be switched to another category? How many others have bear preference points that are now useless?
Why should they refund your money or allow you to switch your points? It is a LOTTERY, you pay to play once a year. If you don’t draw no one is hollering at the WDFW to refund their purchase. You played the lottery and lost, it’s time to move on. Bonus points are a scam that sinks your hooks into you with the false hope that some how you have substantially better odds of winning a draw(LOTTERY).
Actually I used the points option and thus did not lose any drawing. The WDFW created the system that allowed the accumulation of points for future drawings that are now nonexistent for spring bear. They created the system, not me. Technically it is not a lottery as online lottery purchases are illegal in Washington. That is why you can't purchase their raffle tickets online.
Post by: Ghost Hunter on January 26, 2023, 04:07:03 PM
Post by: huntnphool on January 26, 2023, 10:38:55 PM
How about us that drew using our points and now don't have the opportunity to build points? Maybe they should have left that on the board to keep money flowing in. :dunno: :peep:
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
Money still flows! :twocents:
Post by: Falcon on January 27, 2023, 01:10:10 AM
We all need to write Governor Inslee to man up and offer HUNTINPHOOL the next vacant game commissioner position 👊💥👊
Post by: Ghost Hunter on January 27, 2023, 07:08:47 AM
How about us that drew using our points and now don't have the opportunity to build points? Maybe they should have left that on the board to keep money flowing in. :dunno: :peep:
https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,214387.msg2854669.html#msg2854669
Money still flows! :twocents:
A throwback and a good one! I like it. :tup: