Resident PP system all tags...
- Thread starter elks96
- Start date
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Teepee,
I have an issue with the bill as written and the idea that somehow you will all be better off and everything is going to great and fine once the PP system is in place.
I do not believe that a law passed tom implement this system is the right way nor the proper way to address resident concerns around the drawing. I do however think that the DNR in conjunction with sportsmen should put together a plan as to how thing should change and not be ran as a mandate from the legislature. I really do bleieve that most if not all of you do not know how nice it is to be in WY where your not all wrapped up in the PP game. where you can choose to put into a unit having a 7% draw of into a limited unit having 70% odds. VS into units you know you have no option for many years.
I wouldn ot be opposed to any PP systems if:
1. There was extensive research done
2. A decent majority of the hunters in WY supported it
3. Such a system is proven to fall inline with management objectives
4. It gives equal access to young hunters, new residents, returning hunters, etc.
The current system has none of that. Instead it is a money generator for the state and now 7 years in they have myself and every other NR with points over the barrel as we either have to give up our several $100 in points or face the fact that we have no choice to pay the increased tags(this is a separate issue).
Once PP system gets started there is no turning back you are stuck with it for ever. There is no way to turn things around. Instead you will always see groups/individuals looking to modifying the system for their personal agenda/needs. Hence the issue of people with 20+ points in Co who should have drawn but now did not as a % of top tags go to random pool. Or the reduction of NR tags in quality units to make things better for residents, it is not good and I would prefer to take my chances in the draw knowing that I will have the same fair draw chance as everyone else.... Now if it is determined by the overwhelming majority of residents that a wait period should be enacted anytime a person draw a tagthen so be it.
You current bill does not line any of this and as a result you will get exactly what us NR get, a system that could be better in many ways.
Teepee,
I have an issue with the bill as written and the idea that somehow you will all be better off and everything is going to great and fine once the PP system is in place.
I do not believe that a law passed tom implement this system is the right way nor the proper way to address resident concerns around the drawing. I do however think that the DNR in conjunction with sportsmen should put together a plan as to how thing should change and not be ran as a mandate from the legislature. I really do bleieve that most if not all of you do not know how nice it is to be in WY where your not all wrapped up in the PP game. where you can choose to put into a unit having a 7% draw of into a limited unit having 70% odds. VS into units you know you have no option for many years.
I wouldn ot be opposed to any PP systems if:
1. There was extensive research done
2. A decent majority of the hunters in WY supported it
3. Such a system is proven to fall inline with management objectives
4. It gives equal access to young hunters, new residents, returning hunters, etc.
The current system has none of that. Instead it is a money generator for the state and now 7 years in they have myself and every other NR with points over the barrel as we either have to give up our several $100 in points or face the fact that we have no choice to pay the increased tags(this is a separate issue).
Once PP system gets started there is no turning back you are stuck with it for ever. There is no way to turn things around. Instead you will always see groups/individuals looking to modifying the system for their personal agenda/needs. Hence the issue of people with 20+ points in Co who should have drawn but now did not as a % of top tags go to random pool. Or the reduction of NR tags in quality units to make things better for residents, it is not good and I would prefer to take my chances in the draw knowing that I will have the same fair draw chance as everyone else.... Now if it is determined by the overwhelming majority of residents that a wait period should be enacted anytime a person draw a tagthen so be it.
You current bill does not line any of this and as a result you will get exactly what us NR get, a system that could be better in many ways.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13
>AT 01:24?PM (MST)
>
>For the sake of discussion, and
>don't take this personal, but
>exactly who guaranteed your kids,
>or anybody for that matter,
>a Sheep tag or an
>Elk tag in unit 63?
>
>
>
No one but they should at least be guaranteed an equal chance... I will for the sake of this issue try focus on the idea that we are talking about deer/elk/antelope. Sheep and moose are a separate issue.
>LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13
>AT 01:24?PM (MST)
>
>For the sake of discussion, and
>don't take this personal, but
>exactly who guaranteed your kids,
>or anybody for that matter,
>a Sheep tag or an
>Elk tag in unit 63?
>
>
>
No one but they should at least be guaranteed an equal chance... I will for the sake of this issue try focus on the idea that we are talking about deer/elk/antelope. Sheep and moose are a separate issue.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
>You are not entitled to anything
>in this life except air,
>taxes, death and crooked politicians.
>PP's. I also have 4
>kids that are up and
>coming hunters (oldest is 13).
>I've crunched the numbers. They
>will NEVER draw a Sheep
>tag in Wyoming (don't give
>me this 25% is random
>BS either!).
Let me see if I got this right. Yer saying no one is entitled to doodley squat and then yer whining in the next paragraph that yer kids won't ever draw a sheep license.
Reminds of that scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High when Spicoli wrecks that Z28. The kid sez, my brother's gonna schitt, my brother's gonna kill us. Spicoli sez, make up yer mind dude, is he gonna schitt or is he gonna kill us...
>You are not entitled to anything
>in this life except air,
>taxes, death and crooked politicians.
>PP's. I also have 4
>kids that are up and
>coming hunters (oldest is 13).
>I've crunched the numbers. They
>will NEVER draw a Sheep
>tag in Wyoming (don't give
>me this 25% is random
>BS either!).
Let me see if I got this right. Yer saying no one is entitled to doodley squat and then yer whining in the next paragraph that yer kids won't ever draw a sheep license.
Reminds of that scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High when Spicoli wrecks that Z28. The kid sez, my brother's gonna schitt, my brother's gonna kill us. Spicoli sez, make up yer mind dude, is he gonna schitt or is he gonna kill us...
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Topgun, I'm not defending Hicks, but I do think it's pathetic to pile on to someone when they are not "here' to defend themselves. If Hicks is such a bad person (poacher, murderer, Al-Quada operative) then lets hear something specific rather than he introduced legislation that some don't agree with & other senators are obviously buying into since it just passed the 2nd reading in the Senate.
Topgun, I'm not defending Hicks, but I do think it's pathetic to pile on to someone when they are not "here' to defend themselves. If Hicks is such a bad person (poacher, murderer, Al-Quada operative) then lets hear something specific rather than he introduced legislation that some don't agree with & other senators are obviously buying into since it just passed the 2nd reading in the Senate.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Bullchit,
How can he defend bills that havent even been discussed with his own constituency?
Theres things that any Representative has to think about before they decide to push legislation that favors the few over the many. Three of the bills he's signed on with are in direct conflict with the good of the publics wildlife resources...and thats just a fact.
Sportsmen are not required to report to Larry Hicks, rather its the other way around. It seems that those in any public office forget once they get there...who exactly works for whom. They also forget that those that put them in office, will have an opportunity to show them the unemployment line soon enough.
Theres a price to be paid for wearing the daddy-pants.
Bullchit,
How can he defend bills that havent even been discussed with his own constituency?
Theres things that any Representative has to think about before they decide to push legislation that favors the few over the many. Three of the bills he's signed on with are in direct conflict with the good of the publics wildlife resources...and thats just a fact.
Sportsmen are not required to report to Larry Hicks, rather its the other way around. It seems that those in any public office forget once they get there...who exactly works for whom. They also forget that those that put them in office, will have an opportunity to show them the unemployment line soon enough.
Theres a price to be paid for wearing the daddy-pants.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
LOL at chit or git kilt!!! That was a funny movie! I think I understand where he's coming from, but that did throw me off when he basicly contradicted himself on the moose/sheep statement. That is the entire problem when you have few animals, lots of people that want a tag, and a PP system that was started many years ago that locked out most who didn't get in it within the first few years. That is the whole falacy of any straight PP system because for the top units it's only good for the "old timers" who were there at the start. It will also happen every time one is started and that's why staying the random way with a possible tweek of it is the way to have the most fairness across the board to all ages.
LOL at chit or git kilt!!! That was a funny movie! I think I understand where he's coming from, but that did throw me off when he basicly contradicted himself on the moose/sheep statement. That is the entire problem when you have few animals, lots of people that want a tag, and a PP system that was started many years ago that locked out most who didn't get in it within the first few years. That is the whole falacy of any straight PP system because for the top units it's only good for the "old timers" who were there at the start. It will also happen every time one is started and that's why staying the random way with a possible tweek of it is the way to have the most fairness across the board to all ages.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Call it how you like. the guy has introduced a bill to get rid of eliminate a big horn sheep herd as a political stab at the federal government. for no other reason than to use the wildlife that belong to the people of WY as leverage to serve his needs/needs of a very small select group of sheep herders.
Sorry but anyone willing to do this is not going to get a free pass because he is not here to defend himself.
Nor is he going to get a free pass when the guy tells me an all out lie to my face! Face to face he said 80% of residents favor the PP system. Then said I have numbers to prove it. However when asked how the numbers were obtained he quickly did a 90 degree turn. So call it what you want but a guy is only as good as his words and his actions. Right now his actions are:
1. Manadate a system to help me get one last tag before I am gone. 2. Mandate a system where I can then get my self to the head of that line asap by having point sharing,
3. Use a public resource to leverage or benefit a few sheep herders in a game a chess
4. Lie to get what I want!
So while the guy is not the most horrible thing in the world, he is surely not outstanding and a beacon of leadership.
Call it how you like. the guy has introduced a bill to get rid of eliminate a big horn sheep herd as a political stab at the federal government. for no other reason than to use the wildlife that belong to the people of WY as leverage to serve his needs/needs of a very small select group of sheep herders.
Sorry but anyone willing to do this is not going to get a free pass because he is not here to defend himself.
Nor is he going to get a free pass when the guy tells me an all out lie to my face! Face to face he said 80% of residents favor the PP system. Then said I have numbers to prove it. However when asked how the numbers were obtained he quickly did a 90 degree turn. So call it what you want but a guy is only as good as his words and his actions. Right now his actions are:
1. Manadate a system to help me get one last tag before I am gone. 2. Mandate a system where I can then get my self to the head of that line asap by having point sharing,
3. Use a public resource to leverage or benefit a few sheep herders in a game a chess
4. Lie to get what I want!
So while the guy is not the most horrible thing in the world, he is surely not outstanding and a beacon of leadership.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Never saw that movie. Sorry.
My kids are entitled to lots of things. Sheep, moose, elk, deer and goat tags are not one of those things. They are entitled to the same opportunity as everyone else. With the current sheep/moose system and the proposed elk/deer/pronghorn system they will already be behind before they have a chance. No contradiction. Probably just not very eloquent................
All I'm asking is that everyone have a "fair chance". PP's that favor the top tier isn't fair on any account. I went 5 years in a row without drawing on a 75% deer unit. I missed a pronghorn hunt one year where 162 folks put in for 150 tags. I still laugh at that. I was # 3860 out of 3886 on the Bison draw a few years ago.
Someone bring me my pacifier so I can pout. Then bring me a couple tags to make me feel better......... Atleast I had the chance to draw. I'd then buy a leftover or general tag, work my butt off and kill good critters. It's the stuff that made America what it was, not the entitlement attitude that is running rampant now.
Maybe we should require lotto winners to share the winning ticket with everyone who's been putting in the same amount of time or 'invested' X number of dollars.
I could probably be coerced to 'accept' a bonus point system that still relies on chance. As a Carbon County resident, I just emailed Hicks to express my concern. The only 'polling' he ever did on this matter was at Drifters Bar in Baggs with some buddies. To shove this down our throats with NO representation from Sportsmen of Wyoming is a real tragedy.
-Cade
www.HuntForeverWest.com
Never saw that movie. Sorry.
My kids are entitled to lots of things. Sheep, moose, elk, deer and goat tags are not one of those things. They are entitled to the same opportunity as everyone else. With the current sheep/moose system and the proposed elk/deer/pronghorn system they will already be behind before they have a chance. No contradiction. Probably just not very eloquent................
All I'm asking is that everyone have a "fair chance". PP's that favor the top tier isn't fair on any account. I went 5 years in a row without drawing on a 75% deer unit. I missed a pronghorn hunt one year where 162 folks put in for 150 tags. I still laugh at that. I was # 3860 out of 3886 on the Bison draw a few years ago.
Someone bring me my pacifier so I can pout. Then bring me a couple tags to make me feel better......... Atleast I had the chance to draw. I'd then buy a leftover or general tag, work my butt off and kill good critters. It's the stuff that made America what it was, not the entitlement attitude that is running rampant now.
Maybe we should require lotto winners to share the winning ticket with everyone who's been putting in the same amount of time or 'invested' X number of dollars.
I could probably be coerced to 'accept' a bonus point system that still relies on chance. As a Carbon County resident, I just emailed Hicks to express my concern. The only 'polling' he ever did on this matter was at Drifters Bar in Baggs with some buddies. To shove this down our throats with NO representation from Sportsmen of Wyoming is a real tragedy.
-Cade
www.HuntForeverWest.com
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
>Bullchit,
>
>How can he defend bills that
>havent even been discussed with
>his own constituency?
How do you know who has talked to in his district? Maybe his Baggs constituency wants the bill? Discussions that I have had with Sheridan G&F indicated that about 1/2 the hunters are for & half against. They indicated that they had conducted polls, but I've never been asked.
>
>Theres things that any Representative has
>to think about before they
>decide to push legislation that
>favors the few over the
>many. Three of the bills
> he's signed on with
>are in direct conflict with
>the good of the publics
>wildlife resources...and thats just a
>fact.
Once again, you're confusing fact and your opinion. I would agree that in my opinion that the sheep relocation is a bullcrap game of chicken with an environmental group out of Laramie. And in my opinion that the point transfer bill as written is a bad idea. But what about a point transfer only from parent to child under a certain age? The point transfer bill is in the house & not Hick's bill. So, why not track down that legislator and call him a worthless slimeball piece of crap????
>Sportsmen are not required to report
>to Larry Hicks, rather its
>the other way around. It
>seems that those in any
>public office forget once they
>get there...who exactly works for
>whom. They also forget that
>those that put them in
>office, will have an opportunity
>to show them the unemployment
>line soon enough.
>
>Theres a price to be paid
>for wearing the daddy-pants.
>
>
Guess that will be up to Carbon county folks. Guess we'll see in a couple of years.
>
>Bullchit,
>
>How can he defend bills that
>havent even been discussed with
>his own constituency?
How do you know who has talked to in his district? Maybe his Baggs constituency wants the bill? Discussions that I have had with Sheridan G&F indicated that about 1/2 the hunters are for & half against. They indicated that they had conducted polls, but I've never been asked.
>
>Theres things that any Representative has
>to think about before they
>decide to push legislation that
>favors the few over the
>many. Three of the bills
> he's signed on with
>are in direct conflict with
>the good of the publics
>wildlife resources...and thats just a
>fact.
Once again, you're confusing fact and your opinion. I would agree that in my opinion that the sheep relocation is a bullcrap game of chicken with an environmental group out of Laramie. And in my opinion that the point transfer bill as written is a bad idea. But what about a point transfer only from parent to child under a certain age? The point transfer bill is in the house & not Hick's bill. So, why not track down that legislator and call him a worthless slimeball piece of crap????
>Sportsmen are not required to report
>to Larry Hicks, rather its
>the other way around. It
>seems that those in any
>public office forget once they
>get there...who exactly works for
>whom. They also forget that
>those that put them in
>office, will have an opportunity
>to show them the unemployment
>line soon enough.
>
>Theres a price to be paid
>for wearing the daddy-pants.
>
>
Guess that will be up to Carbon county folks. Guess we'll see in a couple of years.
>
nripepi
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,123
So you can plan your hunt earlier instead of having to wait until July! Many non-residents need to get flights, take vacation time, rent a vehicle, book a hotel, get an outfitter, get someone to pack out their elk...schedule babysitters...
With the current preference point system you can plan your hunts much easier and know the probability of you drawing a tag. I have applied a few times in Wyoming where I booked my flights and made my room reservations and reserved a truck way before the results came out because I knew I was going to draw. If you go to a randomn draw, you would not be able to make these plans unless the draw was historically near 100%. If you go randomn, I would hope you could get everything done much quicker (elk is done in less than 3 weeks right now!).
If you have a lot of vacation time and can drive to your unit, you might want what you suggest because your odds would probably be a bit better than the current system.
With the current preference point system you can plan your hunts much easier and know the probability of you drawing a tag. I have applied a few times in Wyoming where I booked my flights and made my room reservations and reserved a truck way before the results came out because I knew I was going to draw. If you go to a randomn draw, you would not be able to make these plans unless the draw was historically near 100%. If you go randomn, I would hope you could get everything done much quicker (elk is done in less than 3 weeks right now!).
If you have a lot of vacation time and can drive to your unit, you might want what you suggest because your odds would probably be a bit better than the current system.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13 AT 04:04PM (MST)[p]Teepee,
Oh really? Larry Hicks isnt involved at all with the point transer bill eh?
Maybe you should read the bill. He's listed as a SPONSOR:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0124
Hunting preference points-transfer.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Baker, Filer and Larsen
and Senator(s) Barnard and Hicks
Clear enough?
Also, I expect better from anyone that fancies himself a hunter and conservationist. This chit isnt rocket science and anyone thats been in the application/preference game as long as Hicks should know better...period.
Let kids work their way through the preference system Hicks is endorsing...just like he stated in his reply to elk96...remember? Teach kids they have to work towards a goal rather than gamble at a Vegas Casino...
Also, in a personal email Larry sent me today, he claims the "poll" he was citing was conducted in 2008 regarding a preference system. Really? He's introducing legislation based on a poll conducted 5 years ago?
Why dont we gather data and base decisions off maps and information gathered from the Lewis and Clark expedition while we're at it...good grief.
LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13 AT 04:04PM (MST)[p]Teepee,
Oh really? Larry Hicks isnt involved at all with the point transer bill eh?
Maybe you should read the bill. He's listed as a SPONSOR:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0124
Hunting preference points-transfer.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Baker, Filer and Larsen
and Senator(s) Barnard and Hicks
Clear enough?
Also, I expect better from anyone that fancies himself a hunter and conservationist. This chit isnt rocket science and anyone thats been in the application/preference game as long as Hicks should know better...period.
Let kids work their way through the preference system Hicks is endorsing...just like he stated in his reply to elk96...remember? Teach kids they have to work towards a goal rather than gamble at a Vegas Casino...
Also, in a personal email Larry sent me today, he claims the "poll" he was citing was conducted in 2008 regarding a preference system. Really? He's introducing legislation based on a poll conducted 5 years ago?
Why dont we gather data and base decisions off maps and information gathered from the Lewis and Clark expedition while we're at it...good grief.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Buzz, I pointed out that very bill on here. Probably read it before you did. Never said he wasn't involved at all with it. Hicks, a senator, can't get up in front of the House and argue for a bill introduced there. Duh.
I'm saying that other legislators are involved & why point your finger at just one. But if it give you a warm & fuzzy by playing Bully, go for it. Hicks is probably a small fish in Cheyenne. If he's the type of personality that you describe, I doubt your letter to him did much good. But it probably made YOU feel good.
I really doubt that data from 2008 would be that dissimilar from anything collected today. What makes you think it would be? Most of the guys I've talked to around here are for a PP system, by about 2 to 1.
What makes you think it would keep kids in the system if they have a small chance at a premium tag every year & never draw. (current system.) So why would the pref point system be a lot different. What about someone going off to college that doesn't want to draw, but could accumulate points while in college to hunt afterwards? I have a friend that is just buying moose & sheep points because he doesn't want a tag for a couple of years. Like most things, there are good points & flaws with a given system. I don't see the pref point debate as any different.
Buzz, I pointed out that very bill on here. Probably read it before you did. Never said he wasn't involved at all with it. Hicks, a senator, can't get up in front of the House and argue for a bill introduced there. Duh.
I'm saying that other legislators are involved & why point your finger at just one. But if it give you a warm & fuzzy by playing Bully, go for it. Hicks is probably a small fish in Cheyenne. If he's the type of personality that you describe, I doubt your letter to him did much good. But it probably made YOU feel good.
I really doubt that data from 2008 would be that dissimilar from anything collected today. What makes you think it would be? Most of the guys I've talked to around here are for a PP system, by about 2 to 1.
What makes you think it would keep kids in the system if they have a small chance at a premium tag every year & never draw. (current system.) So why would the pref point system be a lot different. What about someone going off to college that doesn't want to draw, but could accumulate points while in college to hunt afterwards? I have a friend that is just buying moose & sheep points because he doesn't want a tag for a couple of years. Like most things, there are good points & flaws with a given system. I don't see the pref point debate as any different.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Teepee,
Beings how Larry wasnt even in the Senate 5 years ago, it wouldnt seem prudent to get some up-to-date information?
You dont think things have changed in Wyoming the last 5 years??? New people havent gained residency? New ideas and peoples minds cant change in 5 years?
Alrighty then...
The reason that many are holding Hicks to a higher standard is because he's put himself on just about every piece of legislation to do with hunting.
Teepee,
Beings how Larry wasnt even in the Senate 5 years ago, it wouldnt seem prudent to get some up-to-date information?
You dont think things have changed in Wyoming the last 5 years??? New people havent gained residency? New ideas and peoples minds cant change in 5 years?
Alrighty then...
The reason that many are holding Hicks to a higher standard is because he's put himself on just about every piece of legislation to do with hunting.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
>So if I move to Wyoming
>with my non-resdient points will
>I jump ahead of all
>the long time residents and
>their pathetic one or two
>points
Wyoming here I
>come!
Holy crap your right. I am not so certain that the WY system is not the answer now... A 7 year head start would be great...
>So if I move to Wyoming
>with my non-resdient points will
>I jump ahead of all
>the long time residents and
>their pathetic one or two
>points
Wyoming here I >come!
Holy crap your right. I am not so certain that the WY system is not the answer now... A 7 year head start would be great...
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
That's the way it works right now, as my buddy had been a resident and then moved to Ohio for 2-3 years before moving back again. All his PPs for moose, sheep, and goats were maintained, but he ended up buying a special elk tag to use his 2 NR points so they wouldn't be wasted when he moved back the last time.
That's the way it works right now, as my buddy had been a resident and then moved to Ohio for 2-3 years before moving back again. All his PPs for moose, sheep, and goats were maintained, but he ended up buying a special elk tag to use his 2 NR points so they wouldn't be wasted when he moved back the last time.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Wow.........what a long read this is.
As a non resident in the current preference point system it's almost too funny to read all of the people voicing their displeasure about the proposed resident preference point system.
I only wish these same residents would have stood up and voiced their displeasure over a preference point system when the G&F proposed it for the non residents with just as much hatred for it.
I agree, it's a trap to keep more money going to the G&F.
I think the G&F are so desperate for funding that they are going to do what ever is necessary to keep money coming in weather it affects residents or non residents.
Remember they can't just keep coming up with new plans and fees for the non resident to fund the budget because when those people start bailing out of the system the G&F is going to have a need to keep funds coming in. Thus the resident preference point system.........at a fee of no more than $10.00 (someone else posted)that's easy money for the G&F.
Buzz wrote:
"If a preference system passes, I can assure you that many Residents will be applying their neighbors, non-hunting family members, non-hunting friends, etc for preference points. They will then "piggy-back" as a party member to increase their preference point totals to draw better tags down the road. I'm quite confident that you and I both know hunters that are serious enough to do something like that (hint)."
What's stopping them from doing it currently.
Wow.........what a long read this is.
As a non resident in the current preference point system it's almost too funny to read all of the people voicing their displeasure about the proposed resident preference point system.
I only wish these same residents would have stood up and voiced their displeasure over a preference point system when the G&F proposed it for the non residents with just as much hatred for it.
I agree, it's a trap to keep more money going to the G&F.
I think the G&F are so desperate for funding that they are going to do what ever is necessary to keep money coming in weather it affects residents or non residents.
Remember they can't just keep coming up with new plans and fees for the non resident to fund the budget because when those people start bailing out of the system the G&F is going to have a need to keep funds coming in. Thus the resident preference point system.........at a fee of no more than $10.00 (someone else posted)that's easy money for the G&F.
Buzz wrote:
"If a preference system passes, I can assure you that many Residents will be applying their neighbors, non-hunting family members, non-hunting friends, etc for preference points. They will then "piggy-back" as a party member to increase their preference point totals to draw better tags down the road. I'm quite confident that you and I both know hunters that are serious enough to do something like that (hint)."
What's stopping them from doing it currently.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Duwammer---You lost me on that last sentence question of yours. There is currently only a PP system in place for residents for moose and sheep and that takes them forever to draw because of so few tags being issued. They have no PPs to party together like us NRs can in the draws for deer, elk, and antelope. I actually took advantage of the way the NR draw is set up and partied last year with my 1PP with a guy from Idaho with his 4PPs to get antelope tags in a unit that took almost 3PPs to draw. If you couldn't party together like that and use an average with no rounding down, I'd be waiting another year or two to draw it.
Duwammer---You lost me on that last sentence question of yours. There is currently only a PP system in place for residents for moose and sheep and that takes them forever to draw because of so few tags being issued. They have no PPs to party together like us NRs can in the draws for deer, elk, and antelope. I actually took advantage of the way the NR draw is set up and partied last year with my 1PP with a guy from Idaho with his 4PPs to get antelope tags in a unit that took almost 3PPs to draw. If you couldn't party together like that and use an average with no rounding down, I'd be waiting another year or two to draw it.
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Right now if you put in your family, friends and so on, they get the tag. Unless you shoot it for them (against the law)it does you no good. If it goes to PP you use them to gain more points and then when they have six and you have zero because you drew last year you put in as a party with them on a 3 point draw and you get the tag. And they don't pick up their tag. Happens every year here in Oregon. I know guys that have enough people with points they draw every year. And others that do it all on there own, and draw once every 4th year for the same hunt.
Living it in Oregon, at least we don't transfer points, yet.
DZ
Right now if you put in your family, friends and so on, they get the tag. Unless you shoot it for them (against the law)it does you no good. If it goes to PP you use them to gain more points and then when they have six and you have zero because you drew last year you put in as a party with them on a 3 point draw and you get the tag. And they don't pick up their tag. Happens every year here in Oregon. I know guys that have enough people with points they draw every year. And others that do it all on there own, and draw once every 4th year for the same hunt.
Living it in Oregon, at least we don't transfer points, yet.
DZ
nripepi
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,123
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
They average the points in Wyoming! So if Grandma has 10 points and you have 0, then you and grandma would have 5. This was a big problem in Utah, especially when you were allowed to turn your tag back in. Grandma, who was probably dead by then, just kept turning her tag back in every year! As long as you can't turn tags back in, I don't see a good way to stop this from happening.
They average the points in Wyoming! So if Grandma has 10 points and you have 0, then you and grandma would have 5. This was a big problem in Utah, especially when you were allowed to turn your tag back in. Grandma, who was probably dead by then, just kept turning her tag back in every year! As long as you can't turn tags back in, I don't see a good way to stop this from happening.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
RE: Hicks has spoken!!! LOL...
Its actually even worse when you cant turn the tag back in...
You and Grandma will both have a tag, meaning that either:
1. Grandmas tag gets thrown in the trash (taking opportunity from someone who really wants the tag).
2. Someone in the family illegally hunts on Grandmas tag, which promotes illegal party hunting, crap ethics, just to name a few.
Either option severely impact the guys that are applying and waiting their turn.
Which is the exact reason that these preference systems are not a good idea and why we should stick with a random draw.
The potential for abuse from both a preference system and point transfering are going to kick a lot of hunters right squarely in the sack. Point creep will become a huge issue, just like it is everywhere else.
Its actually even worse when you cant turn the tag back in...
You and Grandma will both have a tag, meaning that either:
1. Grandmas tag gets thrown in the trash (taking opportunity from someone who really wants the tag).
2. Someone in the family illegally hunts on Grandmas tag, which promotes illegal party hunting, crap ethics, just to name a few.
Either option severely impact the guys that are applying and waiting their turn.
Which is the exact reason that these preference systems are not a good idea and why we should stick with a random draw.
The potential for abuse from both a preference system and point transfering are going to kick a lot of hunters right squarely in the sack. Point creep will become a huge issue, just like it is everywhere else.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
So here was the final email between Hicks and I...
Rob: I am not going to argue you can pull what ever you want out of the survey and igonor what you want. Just something to think about becasue you already have pp and they follow you if you go from resident to non resident those points stay with you under WY system. If you moved to WY you have more points for elk, deer and moose than anyone else, do you think we should eliminate that is the new system goes into place.
On another note as you stated you used to draw alomst every year becasue you where lucky. It always seems to me that the people that argue the hardest for the status quoe are those of you that are lucky and subsequently self serving. You have pointed out you really do not care for a system that is fair you just want one that favors you, and you will use any unrelavant arguement, twist the facts amd make up outlandish fabication of the truth to serve yourself. Have a great day.
If you look at it, I can just save my points then move to WY and jump ahead of every single resident. Hell I could, move with my wife and draw the most limited tag in the state 2 times before you all even have a chance to compete with me....
Sounds like a great system. WY please implement this system so that NR can piggy back on residents etc.
Also I did not draw every year because I was lucky. I drew a tag every year because I was forced to play the odds. As a result I put in for one tag easy to draw and 2 tags limited... So that being said, the random draw makes people choose: Do I want to hunt or not hunt. It is almost amusing to hear this guy... He really believes in the system and does not feel necessary to really address any issues with it at all... He avoids every concern with: The sportsmen want it or side steps the issue by saying WY is different than every where else in the world...
Good luck to you all
Rob: I am not going to argue you can pull what ever you want out of the survey and igonor what you want. Just something to think about becasue you already have pp and they follow you if you go from resident to non resident those points stay with you under WY system. If you moved to WY you have more points for elk, deer and moose than anyone else, do you think we should eliminate that is the new system goes into place.
On another note as you stated you used to draw alomst every year becasue you where lucky. It always seems to me that the people that argue the hardest for the status quoe are those of you that are lucky and subsequently self serving. You have pointed out you really do not care for a system that is fair you just want one that favors you, and you will use any unrelavant arguement, twist the facts amd make up outlandish fabication of the truth to serve yourself. Have a great day.
If you look at it, I can just save my points then move to WY and jump ahead of every single resident. Hell I could, move with my wife and draw the most limited tag in the state 2 times before you all even have a chance to compete with me....
Sounds like a great system. WY please implement this system so that NR can piggy back on residents etc.
Also I did not draw every year because I was lucky. I drew a tag every year because I was forced to play the odds. As a result I put in for one tag easy to draw and 2 tags limited... So that being said, the random draw makes people choose: Do I want to hunt or not hunt. It is almost amusing to hear this guy... He really believes in the system and does not feel necessary to really address any issues with it at all... He avoids every concern with: The sportsmen want it or side steps the issue by saying WY is different than every where else in the world...
Good luck to you all
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
Well, when State Senators stop listening...its time to find ones that do.
I'll make sure to do all I can to show him the door during the next election. He barely won his seat, and ran unsuccessfully at least one other time.
Hicks inability to communicate and see both sides of the preference bill/point transfer bill is pretty telling.
The guy just doesnt get it...swallered too much SFW kool-aid and too stubborn and ignorant to see the flaws in his own agenda.
I'll make sure to do all I can to show him the door during the next election. He barely won his seat, and ran unsuccessfully at least one other time.
Hicks inability to communicate and see both sides of the preference bill/point transfer bill is pretty telling.
The guy just doesnt get it...swallered too much SFW kool-aid and too stubborn and ignorant to see the flaws in his own agenda.
Transferring points from resident to nonresident is a simple issue to resolve, I didn't see anything in the bill that states exactly what will happen in that case.
Nothing is perfect and with a random draw that means over the years tags will be allocated to a smaller group of people.
Does anyone want to argue that point?
because If anyone can show some statistics that say a random draw is the best and most fair way to distribute tags then you will have a great argument.
I agree that a point transfer bill is a joke, but simply stating over and over again that a random draw is the most fair way to distribute tags doesn't hold water, because when you look at the math you find its simply not true .
Nothing is perfect and with a random draw that means over the years tags will be allocated to a smaller group of people.
Does anyone want to argue that point?
because If anyone can show some statistics that say a random draw is the best and most fair way to distribute tags then you will have a great argument.
I agree that a point transfer bill is a joke, but simply stating over and over again that a random draw is the most fair way to distribute tags doesn't hold water, because when you look at the math you find its simply not true .
LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-13 AT 12:48PM (MST)[p]piper (3604 posts)
Jan-20-13, 12:16 PM (MST)
126. "RE: Resident PP system all tags..."
Transferring points from resident to nonresident is a simple issue to resolve, I didn't see anything in the bill that states exactly what will happen in that case.
Nothing is perfect and with a random draw that means over the years tags will be allocated to a smaller group of people.
Does anyone want to argue that point?
because If anyone can show some statistics that say a random draw is the best and most fair way to distribute tags then you will have a great argument.
I agree that a point transfer bill is a joke, but simply stating over and over again that a random draw is the most fair way to distribute tags doesn't hold water, because when you look at the math you find its simply not true .
***I'd be glad to continue the discussion until the football games get started in a while.
First off, the Bill doesn't have squat in it to say anything of how it wants to do anything other than force a system of some sort on what sounds like a majority of people who don't want one, at least witout being allowed to develop specifics to make it as foolproof and accepted as possible.
Secondly, how in the world do you figure that as time goes by that tags will go to a smaller group of people because it's a random draw? The only way that would happen is if tag numbers are cut significantly and that could happen regardless of the system in place, especially the way things are going in the mule deer world in particular. Don't blame that on the mere fact that it's a random draw!
The random draw is mathematically the best year in and year out for each individual hunter no matter how you want to argue it. Basic math is a concept of ANY system and to argue like you are shows a very basic lacking in mathematics to keep trying to make a point that will never be valid. What math are you referring to in trying to disprove the basic math fact that each person has the same exact chance to draw a tag in a straight forward random draw like Wyoming now has for Resident deer, elk, and antelope applicants? Let's put it in simple first grade terms this way: If there are 100 persons with their name in the hat for anything in a random chance situation, nobody has a better chance than the next entrant to draw a tag whether one or 50 are drawn---no way, no how!!!
Jan-20-13, 12:16 PM (MST)
126. "RE: Resident PP system all tags..."
Transferring points from resident to nonresident is a simple issue to resolve, I didn't see anything in the bill that states exactly what will happen in that case.
Nothing is perfect and with a random draw that means over the years tags will be allocated to a smaller group of people.
Does anyone want to argue that point?
because If anyone can show some statistics that say a random draw is the best and most fair way to distribute tags then you will have a great argument.
I agree that a point transfer bill is a joke, but simply stating over and over again that a random draw is the most fair way to distribute tags doesn't hold water, because when you look at the math you find its simply not true .
***I'd be glad to continue the discussion until the football games get started in a while.
First off, the Bill doesn't have squat in it to say anything of how it wants to do anything other than force a system of some sort on what sounds like a majority of people who don't want one, at least witout being allowed to develop specifics to make it as foolproof and accepted as possible.
Secondly, how in the world do you figure that as time goes by that tags will go to a smaller group of people because it's a random draw? The only way that would happen is if tag numbers are cut significantly and that could happen regardless of the system in place, especially the way things are going in the mule deer world in particular. Don't blame that on the mere fact that it's a random draw!
The random draw is mathematically the best year in and year out for each individual hunter no matter how you want to argue it. Basic math is a concept of ANY system and to argue like you are shows a very basic lacking in mathematics to keep trying to make a point that will never be valid. What math are you referring to in trying to disprove the basic math fact that each person has the same exact chance to draw a tag in a straight forward random draw like Wyoming now has for Resident deer, elk, and antelope applicants? Let's put it in simple first grade terms this way: If there are 100 persons with their name in the hat for anything in a random chance situation, nobody has a better chance than the next entrant to draw a tag whether one or 50 are drawn---no way, no how!!!
LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-13 AT 01:07PM (MST)[p]Topgun, I don't know what to say? I honestly thought my earlier post where I tried to explain as simply as possible why a larger group of different hunters would be able to hunt over a two or more year period using a bonus point system.
You have to look at things over a multiple year period to understand why a bonus or preference system distributes tags over a wider group of hunters than a random draw.
I think that's where our confusion comes from, Im thinking over a multiple year timeframe, and your thinking single year.
I Think multiple year because in these modern times most people can't hunt everything every year because there are more people wanting tags than there are tags available, therefore I think that a system that allocates a scarce public resource to as many different individuals as possible over the years is the most fair.
You have to look at things over a multiple year period to understand why a bonus or preference system distributes tags over a wider group of hunters than a random draw.
I think that's where our confusion comes from, Im thinking over a multiple year timeframe, and your thinking single year.
I Think multiple year because in these modern times most people can't hunt everything every year because there are more people wanting tags than there are tags available, therefore I think that a system that allocates a scarce public resource to as many different individuals as possible over the years is the most fair.
I was merely responding to your random draw statement on your last post and not making a comment when you start throwing in the alternatives. You are correct that when you start talking a PP or Bonuses within a PP system itself that different hunters will get the chance almost every year compared to the straight random draw. However, there comes the big argument as to whether guys want to wait several or more years to hunt a particular unit once when they already have the chance of getting drawn for it every year in a random system. The fact is that it sounds like the majority of resident hunters in Wyoming would rather have the same chance as the next guy every year when they see the PP totals needed for a one time shot at a unit like the NRs and even residents face in some states. You have to face the fact that the fewer tags there are for a unit the more fair it is to have a random draw so everyone is on an equal basis. When systems exist like they do now that eliminate the young or new hunters from a chance of drawing a tag in many LQ units compared to those who got in from the ground floor when the PP system was instituted, I'd rather have seen Wyoming and all states stay with a random draw. I'd maybe add a disqualifier to make a guy wait several years after he draws a tough tag before he can apply for another or even a OIL on several of the animals like goats, sheep, and probably moose the way they are going downhill in many western units.
"You have to look at things over a multiple year period to understand why a bonus or preference system distributes tags over a wider group of hunters than a random draw."
The only difference is the number of repeat hunters that draw back/back in the random draw. And that number is a guess.
The only difference is the number of repeat hunters that draw back/back in the random draw. And that number is a guess.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
S o why not do something like limit the hunters in random draw units once they draw. Based on the draw odds, we could say that a person who draws could not draw that tag again based on the random draw odds. If they draw 10% odds tag then they have to wait 10 years to apply again for that tag. If it is a 50% odds then wait 2 years, but keep the random draw and not points.
I understand that you believe the points will spread the wealth. But at the same time it has consequences... I would still urge you think twice, long and hard before giving up the most fair equitable system left.
I understand that you believe the points will spread the wealth. But at the same time it has consequences... I would still urge you think twice, long and hard before giving up the most fair equitable system left.
SouthernWyo
Active Member
- Messages
- 175
Why not just leave the system alone? I think that we need to make the distinction between "fair" and "equitable". Fair is allowing everyone the same chance, equitable is spreading the wealth among as many people as possible. I would rather the system be fair. To me, equitable distribution of anything, especially through rules, is a result of the entitlement mentality that seems to dominate society today. No one deserves or is entitled to these licenses. We deserve only the same chance as everyone else, offered through a totally random draw process.
Will this result in someone pulling a tag more than once while someone else doesn't get it at all? Of course, but so what, that's life. Some people get things that others don't.
Will this result in someone pulling a tag more than once while someone else doesn't get it at all? Of course, but so what, that's life. Some people get things that others don't.
Utah400Elk
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,267
I think I am moving to Alaska this summer. I am also in the middle of a health scare that has brought some new found focus to me. That being said, I have a few ideas for Wyoming. I am still a resident but I won't be very soon. I think the random draw is simply the best system out there. If people want to see more people draw the best tags there are a few simple things that could be done to help the current system IMO. Again, I think the best system is the one we have. Why not limit the residents to one animal (i.e. elk or deer or lope). That would change the draw odds for the hard to reach units but still allow people to change their minds without any penalty. If that dosen't do enough Wyoming could put a waiting period on a person after the tag is drawn. Put a 3 year waiting period on each animal. Simply put these two changes would decrease the number of people on any one year putting in for the hunt. Fewer people putting in would eqaul better odds. I like the current sytem better but I think these ideas are a lot better than a point sytem or a point transfer sytem. JMO and I am not going to be a resident much longer I have a fear that a few people in Wyoming want to be like Utah soooooo bad that is will happen one day. I think there are to many backroom deals happening and eventually the money game will start. I hope I am wrong. I know several state legislators and they keep regurgitating rehtoric that makes me sick. I know both the Governor and the AG. I have had lunch with them and talked with both of them about my thoughts but don't know if they listened or care. They are friends but they are politicians first.
I have a fear that a few people in Wyoming want to be like Utah soooooo bad that is will happen one day. I think there are to many backroom deals happening and eventually the money game will start. I hope I am wrong. I know several state legislators and they keep regurgitating rehtoric that makes me sick. I know both the Governor and the AG. I have had lunch with them and talked with both of them about my thoughts but don't know if they listened or care. They are friends but they are politicians first."They are friends, but they are politicians first."
You said a mouthful with those few words pardner!!! I think a waiting period of 2-3 years could be easily added to the system and make a big difference. Even just a one year wait could help. I'm not sure about the suggestion to only be able to apply for one animal each year though. Maybe the way to allow a person a chance at hunting something each year would to allow them to apply for multiple animals, but take their name out of the other draws as soon as they draw a tag in any of them that year. That would probably still help the overall odds for others who say they never draw anything.
You said a mouthful with those few words pardner!!! I think a waiting period of 2-3 years could be easily added to the system and make a big difference. Even just a one year wait could help. I'm not sure about the suggestion to only be able to apply for one animal each year though. Maybe the way to allow a person a chance at hunting something each year would to allow them to apply for multiple animals, but take their name out of the other draws as soon as they draw a tag in any of them that year. That would probably still help the overall odds for others who say they never draw anything.
Kind of funny, putting in for only one species is basicly what Utah does to residents and used to do with nonresidents, and a mandatory waiting period would not work well, especially on pronghorns, there are many units that are near 100% draw and some with left over tags ect.
The entitlement talk is pathetic, "that's life" sounds tough and absolute I guess, so anyone who would like to see the public have the best, most balanced, fair and equitable way to distribute hunting tags is part of todays entitlement society? amazing.
Many people really look forward to hunting season, it binds families together, and is the favorite thing to do for many of us, so Im sorry if some of us feel entitled to be part of the process, should we feel bad about using water and breathing air too?
When there are nonresidents that have drawn several antelope tags using the preference point system and then residents have drawn none in the same units using the random draw, your going to see discontent, that's the way the ball bounces, get used to it.
Personally I don't like the straight random draw, yet I dislike the current preference point system in Wyoming a lot more.
The entitlement talk is pathetic, "that's life" sounds tough and absolute I guess, so anyone who would like to see the public have the best, most balanced, fair and equitable way to distribute hunting tags is part of todays entitlement society? amazing.
Many people really look forward to hunting season, it binds families together, and is the favorite thing to do for many of us, so Im sorry if some of us feel entitled to be part of the process, should we feel bad about using water and breathing air too?
When there are nonresidents that have drawn several antelope tags using the preference point system and then residents have drawn none in the same units using the random draw, your going to see discontent, that's the way the ball bounces, get used to it.
Personally I don't like the straight random draw, yet I dislike the current preference point system in Wyoming a lot more.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
Piper,
I think the thing that people in Wyoming are most bothered by is the lack of looking at viable options.
As much as I disagree with WYSFW/Bob Wharff, he and I had a great discussion today regarding some of the problems and misconceptions surrounding preference points.
One thing he brought up is that many times, the people who absolutely DO draw tags year after year in hard to draw units are Landowners who are getting guaranteed tags every year. How many of the "stories" that we're hearing about some guy being "lucky" year after year in say deer unit 102, are really getting guarnateed landowner tags?
How many hunters realize that EVERY single tag for elk, deer, and antelope could be ALL given to Landowners? There is no sub-quota on how many landowner tags can be given to landowners. In other words, if a unit issues 20 tags for mule deer...if 20 landowners apply...they get them all. No permits would be issued to the public.
There is also no discussion or thought being given to having areas with say, less than 10-15% odds for mule deer, elk, or antelope being once every five years, or even once-in-a-lifetime.
Those are just a few examples, and I know many hunters that have some great ideas that could solve the problem without implementing a preference point system. Any Preference point system adopted is going to favor one hunter over another, by definition that is what PREFERENCE is...one group/thing/item being given priority over others.
No matter how you look at it...a preference system is not a "fair" system...by design and definition it absolutely cant be.
I'm open to discussing options, but I'm 100% opposed to preference points, and always will be. I think theres a lot of misconception and out-right bullchit that revolves around the stories being passed around that "my neighbor draws unit 100 elk tags every year"...
Send Larry Hicks and the wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources committee a note telling them you want to table SF85 and have discussions about other options before we pass sf85.
Only option since you dont like the Preference System and dont like the Random draw.
I think the thing that people in Wyoming are most bothered by is the lack of looking at viable options.
As much as I disagree with WYSFW/Bob Wharff, he and I had a great discussion today regarding some of the problems and misconceptions surrounding preference points.
One thing he brought up is that many times, the people who absolutely DO draw tags year after year in hard to draw units are Landowners who are getting guaranteed tags every year. How many of the "stories" that we're hearing about some guy being "lucky" year after year in say deer unit 102, are really getting guarnateed landowner tags?
How many hunters realize that EVERY single tag for elk, deer, and antelope could be ALL given to Landowners? There is no sub-quota on how many landowner tags can be given to landowners. In other words, if a unit issues 20 tags for mule deer...if 20 landowners apply...they get them all. No permits would be issued to the public.
There is also no discussion or thought being given to having areas with say, less than 10-15% odds for mule deer, elk, or antelope being once every five years, or even once-in-a-lifetime.
Those are just a few examples, and I know many hunters that have some great ideas that could solve the problem without implementing a preference point system. Any Preference point system adopted is going to favor one hunter over another, by definition that is what PREFERENCE is...one group/thing/item being given priority over others.
No matter how you look at it...a preference system is not a "fair" system...by design and definition it absolutely cant be.
I'm open to discussing options, but I'm 100% opposed to preference points, and always will be. I think theres a lot of misconception and out-right bullchit that revolves around the stories being passed around that "my neighbor draws unit 100 elk tags every year"...
Send Larry Hicks and the wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources committee a note telling them you want to table SF85 and have discussions about other options before we pass sf85.
Only option since you dont like the Preference System and dont like the Random draw.
Utah400Elk
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 1,267
LAST EDITED ON Jan-21-13 AT 03:08PM (MST)[p]Like I said, I think the best system is the one in place now. My prediction is that a PP sytem will be put in place. Once a few people have drawn their tags they will relize they are out of the game for a LONG time. Then they will try and change the system again to their benifit.
Just FYI
Elk unit 30
2012 534 people put in for first choice with 25 tags.
If a PP system starts and its like the NR PP system then...
(25 tags x 75% = approx 19 tags available) 534 applicants/19 tags = 28 + year to get through the max point holders.
Elk unit 31
Same math...
2012 1493 applicants for 81 tags...
1493/61 tags = 24 + years for max points
Elk unit 100
Same Math...
2012 2993 applicants for 140 tags...
2993/105 = 28 years + for max points
Deer unit 102
Same Math...
2012 4012 applicants for 302 tags...
4012/227 = 17 years for max points.
I can keep going but the long and short of it is that anybody that does not jump on board from the start will have a 20 + year wait before they even have a real chance at a tag. Wait three or four years and you don't really have a chance but a few people will be 100% in their lifetime for a tag.
To me thats not a good system.
Just FYI
Elk unit 30
2012 534 people put in for first choice with 25 tags.
If a PP system starts and its like the NR PP system then...
(25 tags x 75% = approx 19 tags available) 534 applicants/19 tags = 28 + year to get through the max point holders.
Elk unit 31
Same math...
2012 1493 applicants for 81 tags...
1493/61 tags = 24 + years for max points
Elk unit 100
Same Math...
2012 2993 applicants for 140 tags...
2993/105 = 28 years + for max points
Deer unit 102
Same Math...
2012 4012 applicants for 302 tags...
4012/227 = 17 years for max points.
I can keep going but the long and short of it is that anybody that does not jump on board from the start will have a 20 + year wait before they even have a real chance at a tag. Wait three or four years and you don't really have a chance but a few people will be 100% in their lifetime for a tag.
To me thats not a good system.
elks96
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 3,820
>Kind of funny, putting in for
>only one species is basicly
>what Utah does to residents
>and used to do with
>nonresidents, and a mandatory
>waiting period would not work
>well, especially on pronghorns, there
>are many units that are
>near 100% draw and some
>with left over tags ect.
>
>
>The entitlement talk is pathetic, "that's
>life" sounds tough and absolute
>I guess, so anyone who
>would like to see the
>public have the best, most
>balanced, fair and equitable
>way to distribute hunting tags
>is part of todays entitlement
>society? amazing.
>
>Many people really look forward to
>hunting season, it binds families
>together, and is the favorite
>thing to do for many
>of us, so Im
>sorry if some of us
>feel entitled to be part
>of the process, should we
>feel bad about using water
>and breathing air too?
>When there are nonresidents that have
>drawn several antelope tags using
>the preference point system and
>then residents have drawn none
>in the same units using
>the random draw, your going
>to see discontent, that's the
>way the ball bounces, get
>used to it.
>Personally I don't like the
>straight random draw, yet I
>dislike the current preference point
>system in Wyoming a lot
>more.
So you do not like the current PP, you do not like the random draw, so what do you really want? It really boils down to what is acceptable and not acceptable. The PP system will change hunting in WY for ever, and while it may mean that a few more hunters get to hunt the limited units over the course of some 30 years, it also take new hunters out of the ranks. Not matter what happens you should be very afraid that this is going through with out your input, or any input from other residents. I would think that the best case scenario for WY is to table this for 1 year. In that year do extensive research and planning with all stake holders. Form those meetings develop a system that balances out as many issues as possible. Be it a bonus point system, a wait period on applying for limited tags, etc. Right now your headed for a train wreck...
But heck if you want a system where I move into your state next year can can draw as a resident using my 7 points. then the next year I use my wives 7 points to average to 3 then the following year use my dads points I will do it and laugh every trip I make to the taxi man while you still look at a 20+ year wait for you fair guaranteed tag.
>only one species is basicly
>what Utah does to residents
>and used to do with
>nonresidents, and a mandatory
>waiting period would not work
>well, especially on pronghorns, there
>are many units that are
>near 100% draw and some
>with left over tags ect.
>
>
>The entitlement talk is pathetic, "that's
>life" sounds tough and absolute
>I guess, so anyone who
>would like to see the
>public have the best, most
>balanced, fair and equitable
>way to distribute hunting tags
>is part of todays entitlement
>society? amazing.
>
>Many people really look forward to
>hunting season, it binds families
>together, and is the favorite
>thing to do for many
>of us, so Im
>sorry if some of us
>feel entitled to be part
>of the process, should we
>feel bad about using water
>and breathing air too?
>When there are nonresidents that have
>drawn several antelope tags using
>the preference point system and
>then residents have drawn none
>in the same units using
>the random draw, your going
>to see discontent, that's the
>way the ball bounces, get
>used to it.
>Personally I don't like the
>straight random draw, yet I
>dislike the current preference point
>system in Wyoming a lot
>more.
So you do not like the current PP, you do not like the random draw, so what do you really want? It really boils down to what is acceptable and not acceptable. The PP system will change hunting in WY for ever, and while it may mean that a few more hunters get to hunt the limited units over the course of some 30 years, it also take new hunters out of the ranks. Not matter what happens you should be very afraid that this is going through with out your input, or any input from other residents. I would think that the best case scenario for WY is to table this for 1 year. In that year do extensive research and planning with all stake holders. Form those meetings develop a system that balances out as many issues as possible. Be it a bonus point system, a wait period on applying for limited tags, etc. Right now your headed for a train wreck...
But heck if you want a system where I move into your state next year can can draw as a resident using my 7 points. then the next year I use my wives 7 points to average to 3 then the following year use my dads points I will do it and laugh every trip I make to the taxi man while you still look at a 20+ year wait for you fair guaranteed tag.
I have been calling people, Im going to talk to the area supervisor at WGF tomorrow about these bills, Im discusted just like most of us.
There are no perfect solutions, I like Colorados preference system when it comes to deer, I don't like it for elk though.
I actually think Utahs drawing system itself works pretty well,and is quite fair considering that there are so few tags and so many applicants.
I watched Nevada go from just buying a tag to the current system, and with so much demand for so few resources, I don't see how a random draw would ever work well in that state these days.
So I agree, everything should be put on hold, and the politicians who came up with the transferring point scheme should be flogged in public.
There are no perfect solutions, I like Colorados preference system when it comes to deer, I don't like it for elk though.
I actually think Utahs drawing system itself works pretty well,and is quite fair considering that there are so few tags and so many applicants.
I watched Nevada go from just buying a tag to the current system, and with so much demand for so few resources, I don't see how a random draw would ever work well in that state these days.
So I agree, everything should be put on hold, and the politicians who came up with the transferring point scheme should be flogged in public.
nontypical
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,213
Here is my plan,and I think it would work okay,but it is fairly complex(that is why G&F doesn't like it).Start off with three separate draws;elk first,deer second,antelope third.If you draw elk,you are out of the other 2.If you draw a deer tag,you are out of the antelope draw.Couple that with a waiting period for units under 10% odds,and also have a BP system that caps points at 3.I think a guy could draw an antelope tag most years-at least every other year.
The reason people want a point system is because they get tired of never drawing a tag while watching others draw them consistently.It's pretty simple.Does that make them selfish?I suppose it depends on your perspective.
If there was only one dissenting vote against this bill,I have to assume that there are many folks in favor of it who have contacted their senators.
This has been discussed ad nauseum with local G&F.They don't want to change anything because they claim it adds more work for them,basically.
As far as landowner tags,I would like to see the amount of land raised to 640 acres to qualify.It's currently 160 acres.
At my age,this PP system might actually help me draw the tag I've been applying for for close to 25 years.That being said,I still think it's a load of crap that needs to be defeated in the house pending further discussion of other viable alternatives.
The reason people want a point system is because they get tired of never drawing a tag while watching others draw them consistently.It's pretty simple.Does that make them selfish?I suppose it depends on your perspective.
If there was only one dissenting vote against this bill,I have to assume that there are many folks in favor of it who have contacted their senators.
This has been discussed ad nauseum with local G&F.They don't want to change anything because they claim it adds more work for them,basically.
As far as landowner tags,I would like to see the amount of land raised to 640 acres to qualify.It's currently 160 acres.
At my age,this PP system might actually help me draw the tag I've been applying for for close to 25 years.That being said,I still think it's a load of crap that needs to be defeated in the house pending further discussion of other viable alternatives.
nontypical
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,213
They could even still have the same application period.Just do the draws separately.
BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,231
nontypical,
Even though I dont personally care for your plan...its still a valid idea that does deserve to be heard before we adopt the bill thats introduced now.
Thats a perfect example of how the Legislature flat ignores the valid input that many could provide, including your idea.
The only way meaningful dialogue and the implemtation of a sound plan will happen, is if we sit down as a collective group of hunters and demand they listen to our ideas.
The only people that will be impacted by a preference/bonus system are those that are applying for tags.
Which raises the question of why we havent had working groups, meetings, and discussion of ALL ideas PRIOR to introducing legislation.
Hicks based his decision to introduce the bill on information gathered in 2008 by a survey of a whopping 600 resident hunters.
Really??? He drafts legislation and defends it from a 5 year old study of 600 Hunters? Not to mention, that IMO, he's cherry picking the data even from that study. Of those in favor of a preference system, most were only moderately in favor. While a majority of those that opposed a preference system were STRONGLY OPPOSED.
I encourage you all to send out more emails asking that SF85 be tabled. Lets stop this one now, get some discussion and ideas flowing in the next year or so, and try to come up with something that a larger majority can live with.
I know we can do better than SF85...a third grader could have come up with that legislation.
Even though I dont personally care for your plan...its still a valid idea that does deserve to be heard before we adopt the bill thats introduced now.
Thats a perfect example of how the Legislature flat ignores the valid input that many could provide, including your idea.
The only way meaningful dialogue and the implemtation of a sound plan will happen, is if we sit down as a collective group of hunters and demand they listen to our ideas.
The only people that will be impacted by a preference/bonus system are those that are applying for tags.
Which raises the question of why we havent had working groups, meetings, and discussion of ALL ideas PRIOR to introducing legislation.
Hicks based his decision to introduce the bill on information gathered in 2008 by a survey of a whopping 600 resident hunters.
Really??? He drafts legislation and defends it from a 5 year old study of 600 Hunters? Not to mention, that IMO, he's cherry picking the data even from that study. Of those in favor of a preference system, most were only moderately in favor. While a majority of those that opposed a preference system were STRONGLY OPPOSED.
I encourage you all to send out more emails asking that SF85 be tabled. Lets stop this one now, get some discussion and ideas flowing in the next year or so, and try to come up with something that a larger majority can live with.
I know we can do better than SF85...a third grader could have come up with that legislation.
SouthernWyo
Active Member
- Messages
- 175
Oh for crying out loud piper, comparing recreation to your right to air and water? Really? Keep your sense of humor, dude.
Contact your represenatives and tell them that resident pref points is a bad idea for Wyoming residents. Tell them that we favor something being done to improve odds but they should appoint a working group to figure out what works best for Wyoming residents.
-They do nothing to improve odds as anyone that understands first grade math can disgest that there is only two ways to offer better odds. One, increase the amount of hunting permits available through the draw. Two, lower the amount of applicants applying. Pref points do nothing to increase overall odds!!!!
-Tell them that a vote for preference points are destroying youth opportunity by guarenteeing that future hunters will have to wait 10, 12, or 20 years before drawing a limited quota area.
-Tell them that something to address resident draw odds (like what non-typical is advocating) is needed and long overdue. But to settle on preference points is an absolute disservice to the residents of Wyoming.
-They do nothing to improve odds as anyone that understands first grade math can disgest that there is only two ways to offer better odds. One, increase the amount of hunting permits available through the draw. Two, lower the amount of applicants applying. Pref points do nothing to increase overall odds!!!!
-Tell them that a vote for preference points are destroying youth opportunity by guarenteeing that future hunters will have to wait 10, 12, or 20 years before drawing a limited quota area.
-Tell them that something to address resident draw odds (like what non-typical is advocating) is needed and long overdue. But to settle on preference points is an absolute disservice to the residents of Wyoming.
Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters
Urge 2 Hunt
We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.
