I wondered what you all thought about changes to the PP system that I came up with. I know it won't be popular with everyone, but I think it is better than PP banking system, and I think it improves upon the current system, especially with regards to Point creep. This is basically the letter I send to CPW so it's pretty long. I don't know if anyone there (or here) will actually read it, but I think it could be a really good system.
I would modify the way the draw works for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice hunt codes. With the current system, it is really only possible to draw a tag with 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices if the unit requires no Preference Points for a first choice draw (for the most part). This makes the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice option useless for many hunters. In a new draw system, Preference Points should be taken into consideration for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice hunt codes. They should also be diminished when successful in drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag. An applicant successful in a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice draw would lose some, but not all Preference Points.
The new system would be like the current one in that hunters unsuccessful in the draw for their 1st choice hunt code would generate a Preference Point. Hunters successful in the drawing for their 1st choice hunt code would still lose all Preference Points for that species. The modified system would differ from the current system in that hunters with higher preference points would be given priority for their second choice hunt code, if unsuccessful in the draw for their 1st choice hunt code. In the same way, hunters unsuccessful in their 2nd choice hunt code would be given priority for their 3rd choice hunt code based on their number of Preference Points, and so on for 4th choice hunt codes. Second, 3rd, and 4th choice hunts would still not generate Preference Points. Leftover and Over the Counter tags would not use or generate Preference Points.
If an applicant is successful in drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag, he/she would lose the minimum number of Preference Points needed to draw that hunt code as a 1st choice, plus one Preference Point. For example, if a unit requires 3 Preference Points to draw a tag as a 1st choice, it would cost an applicant 3 + 1 Preference Points to draw as a 2nd choice tag (or 3rd or 4th choice). So if a hunter had 9 Preference Points pre-draw, he would gain 1 Preference Point from being unsuccessful for his 1st choice, giving him 10 Preference Points. If successful for that unit as a 2nd choice, he would then lose 3 + 1= 4 Preference Points. After the draw, he would have 6 Preference Points and a 2nd choice tag.
A unit which typically requires zero Preference Points to draw as a first choice hunt code would use 0 + 1 = 1 Preference Point if drawn as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice hunt code. Essentially, by successfully drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag, the hunter is losing the Preference point he gained from being unsuccessful in the 1st choice draw.
In this system, hunters must choose between three basic options each season:
1) Building up Preference Points and not hunting,
2) Building up Preference Points and hunting with an Over The Counter or Leftover Tag, or
3) Not building up Preference Points and hunting with a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag.
In order to be fair to applicants who are applying to units as a 1st choice, and give them preference over those applying as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice, a certain number of tags per unit must be guaranteed to go to first choice applicants. For example 60% of tags per hunt code must be used for 1st choice applicants, 25% for second, 10% for 3rd, and 5% for 4th choice applicants (these percentages are examples only and the actual numbers would need to be set by CPW). This ensures a greater probability of success in the draw for applicants applying for a hunt code as a first choice, even if they have fewer Preference Points than those applying for the same hunt code as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice. In other words, 2nd choice applicants with high Preference Points are not guaranteed a successful draw over 1st choice applicants with lower number of Preference Points. However they still have a chance at drawing 2nd, 3rd, and 4thchoice hunt codes which typically require some Preference Points as a 1st choice hunt code, in contrast to the current system where they would stand essentially no chance in most such units.
A higher percentage of tags may be given to 1st choice applicants if there are not enough hunters applying for the hunt code as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice (i.e. fewer 2nd choice applicants than 25% of the tags). More tags could be given to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice applicants if there are not enough 1st choice applicants.
Certain low quota units would not be eligible to draw as 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choices unless there were too few 1st choice applicants. For example units which only have 2 tags per hunt code would only be eligible to draw as a 1st choice hunt code, unless there were fewer than 2 applicants who applied for the tag as a 1st choice hunt code.
Since a hunter who is unsuccessful in the draw for his 1st choice still gains a Preference Point in this system, it is important to note that it is the number of Preference Points the applicant has Pre-draw that is used in determining preference for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice tags. So if he has 10 Preference Points Pre-draw, and is unsuccessful in drawing his 1st choice tag, he is then awarded a Preference Point bringing his total to 11. However, in consideration for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice draw, he is ranked with his 10 Preference Points, not 11.
In order to control Preference Point creep, the mindset of a new system should be to decrease the overall Preference Points in the bank of all hunters/applicants. Or at least to slow the rate at which they are accumulating. The described system is similar to a banking system, but important differences exist. The previously used banking system did not drop a successful 1st choice applicant to zero, and a successful 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice draw did not cost the applicant any Preference Points at all. Because of this, the abandoned banking system did not deplete the overall bank of Preference Points. Of course, if successful 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice draws cost applicants all their Preference Points, then they will be discouraged from applying for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice tags. So it is important that they only lose the minimum Preference Points required to draw as a 1st choice plus 1. In the new system, since the Preference Point gained by being unsuccessful in the 1st choice draw is subsequently used if a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag is drawn, the hunter really does not gain a Preference Point. This will aid in preventing Preference Points accumulating per individual hunter as well as in the overall bank.
While the currently used Hybrid Draw gives hunters with lower points the opportunity to hunt high end units they would otherwise never be able to hunt, it also takes that opportunity away from some of those hunters with enough Preference Points to hunt that unit. This means that some of the applicants with the highest Preference Points do not have their Preference Points dropped to zero, because someone with possibly only 5 Preference Points drew the tag. This leaves more Preference Points in the overall bank of Points.
I think that many hunters realize that at this point there are high end units that they will never have enough points to draw. If they apply for a middle end unit as a 1st choice, then they lose all their points and may feel they are ?wasting? Preference Points and years spent accumulating them. In the current system, it is pointless to apply for the middle end unit as a 2nd choice as they stand no chance of drawing it as such. So they fall into the trap of building points each year. The new system gives a chance of drawing more tags as 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices, without the penalty of losing all Preference Points. In this way more hunters with high Preference Points may be encouraged to ?drop out? of the running for the highest end units.
This system may see an increase in competition for the lower end units, since some tags will be allotted to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice applicants. However many hunters that apply for these units as 1st choice and typically draw the tag will have the option of applying for 2nd, 3rd and 4th choice tags as well. Previously they may not have used this option as they had good success in the draw for their 1st choice hunt. This should push more hunters into applying for units which may have had leftover tags in years past. So fewer tags should go unpurchased, which would have the added benefit of increased revenues.
I hope you are able to see the merits of this revised system. I do believe that with time, it would help to combat Preference Point creep. It would have to be implemented for more than 1 year to be effective. I also think that the majority of hunters would enjoy the prospect of a greater chance at drawing quality tags as 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices. I also think this system would get more hunters into the field.
I would modify the way the draw works for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice hunt codes. With the current system, it is really only possible to draw a tag with 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices if the unit requires no Preference Points for a first choice draw (for the most part). This makes the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice option useless for many hunters. In a new draw system, Preference Points should be taken into consideration for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice hunt codes. They should also be diminished when successful in drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag. An applicant successful in a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice draw would lose some, but not all Preference Points.
The new system would be like the current one in that hunters unsuccessful in the draw for their 1st choice hunt code would generate a Preference Point. Hunters successful in the drawing for their 1st choice hunt code would still lose all Preference Points for that species. The modified system would differ from the current system in that hunters with higher preference points would be given priority for their second choice hunt code, if unsuccessful in the draw for their 1st choice hunt code. In the same way, hunters unsuccessful in their 2nd choice hunt code would be given priority for their 3rd choice hunt code based on their number of Preference Points, and so on for 4th choice hunt codes. Second, 3rd, and 4th choice hunts would still not generate Preference Points. Leftover and Over the Counter tags would not use or generate Preference Points.
If an applicant is successful in drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag, he/she would lose the minimum number of Preference Points needed to draw that hunt code as a 1st choice, plus one Preference Point. For example, if a unit requires 3 Preference Points to draw a tag as a 1st choice, it would cost an applicant 3 + 1 Preference Points to draw as a 2nd choice tag (or 3rd or 4th choice). So if a hunter had 9 Preference Points pre-draw, he would gain 1 Preference Point from being unsuccessful for his 1st choice, giving him 10 Preference Points. If successful for that unit as a 2nd choice, he would then lose 3 + 1= 4 Preference Points. After the draw, he would have 6 Preference Points and a 2nd choice tag.
A unit which typically requires zero Preference Points to draw as a first choice hunt code would use 0 + 1 = 1 Preference Point if drawn as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice hunt code. Essentially, by successfully drawing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag, the hunter is losing the Preference point he gained from being unsuccessful in the 1st choice draw.
In this system, hunters must choose between three basic options each season:
1) Building up Preference Points and not hunting,
2) Building up Preference Points and hunting with an Over The Counter or Leftover Tag, or
3) Not building up Preference Points and hunting with a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag.
In order to be fair to applicants who are applying to units as a 1st choice, and give them preference over those applying as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice, a certain number of tags per unit must be guaranteed to go to first choice applicants. For example 60% of tags per hunt code must be used for 1st choice applicants, 25% for second, 10% for 3rd, and 5% for 4th choice applicants (these percentages are examples only and the actual numbers would need to be set by CPW). This ensures a greater probability of success in the draw for applicants applying for a hunt code as a first choice, even if they have fewer Preference Points than those applying for the same hunt code as a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice. In other words, 2nd choice applicants with high Preference Points are not guaranteed a successful draw over 1st choice applicants with lower number of Preference Points. However they still have a chance at drawing 2nd, 3rd, and 4thchoice hunt codes which typically require some Preference Points as a 1st choice hunt code, in contrast to the current system where they would stand essentially no chance in most such units.
A higher percentage of tags may be given to 1st choice applicants if there are not enough hunters applying for the hunt code as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice (i.e. fewer 2nd choice applicants than 25% of the tags). More tags could be given to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice applicants if there are not enough 1st choice applicants.
Certain low quota units would not be eligible to draw as 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choices unless there were too few 1st choice applicants. For example units which only have 2 tags per hunt code would only be eligible to draw as a 1st choice hunt code, unless there were fewer than 2 applicants who applied for the tag as a 1st choice hunt code.
Since a hunter who is unsuccessful in the draw for his 1st choice still gains a Preference Point in this system, it is important to note that it is the number of Preference Points the applicant has Pre-draw that is used in determining preference for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice tags. So if he has 10 Preference Points Pre-draw, and is unsuccessful in drawing his 1st choice tag, he is then awarded a Preference Point bringing his total to 11. However, in consideration for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice draw, he is ranked with his 10 Preference Points, not 11.
In order to control Preference Point creep, the mindset of a new system should be to decrease the overall Preference Points in the bank of all hunters/applicants. Or at least to slow the rate at which they are accumulating. The described system is similar to a banking system, but important differences exist. The previously used banking system did not drop a successful 1st choice applicant to zero, and a successful 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice draw did not cost the applicant any Preference Points at all. Because of this, the abandoned banking system did not deplete the overall bank of Preference Points. Of course, if successful 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice draws cost applicants all their Preference Points, then they will be discouraged from applying for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice tags. So it is important that they only lose the minimum Preference Points required to draw as a 1st choice plus 1. In the new system, since the Preference Point gained by being unsuccessful in the 1st choice draw is subsequently used if a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice tag is drawn, the hunter really does not gain a Preference Point. This will aid in preventing Preference Points accumulating per individual hunter as well as in the overall bank.
While the currently used Hybrid Draw gives hunters with lower points the opportunity to hunt high end units they would otherwise never be able to hunt, it also takes that opportunity away from some of those hunters with enough Preference Points to hunt that unit. This means that some of the applicants with the highest Preference Points do not have their Preference Points dropped to zero, because someone with possibly only 5 Preference Points drew the tag. This leaves more Preference Points in the overall bank of Points.
I think that many hunters realize that at this point there are high end units that they will never have enough points to draw. If they apply for a middle end unit as a 1st choice, then they lose all their points and may feel they are ?wasting? Preference Points and years spent accumulating them. In the current system, it is pointless to apply for the middle end unit as a 2nd choice as they stand no chance of drawing it as such. So they fall into the trap of building points each year. The new system gives a chance of drawing more tags as 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices, without the penalty of losing all Preference Points. In this way more hunters with high Preference Points may be encouraged to ?drop out? of the running for the highest end units.
This system may see an increase in competition for the lower end units, since some tags will be allotted to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choice applicants. However many hunters that apply for these units as 1st choice and typically draw the tag will have the option of applying for 2nd, 3rd and 4th choice tags as well. Previously they may not have used this option as they had good success in the draw for their 1st choice hunt. This should push more hunters into applying for units which may have had leftover tags in years past. So fewer tags should go unpurchased, which would have the added benefit of increased revenues.
I hope you are able to see the merits of this revised system. I do believe that with time, it would help to combat Preference Point creep. It would have to be implemented for more than 1 year to be effective. I also think that the majority of hunters would enjoy the prospect of a greater chance at drawing quality tags as 2nd, 3rd, and 4th choices. I also think this system would get more hunters into the field.
