BuzzH
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 6,085
Sucks to be them...one guy did some thinking.How many points do you have? Everyone I know, but 1 let theirs go years ago.
Sucks to be them...one guy did some thinking.How many points do you have? Everyone I know, but 1 let theirs go years ago.
That is a good question. Yes, I could have drawn moose, but no I could not have drawn sheep. I chose not to apply for a lower demand moose unit as that was my choice and I was not worried about it as time was on my side and I was holding my place in line and if nothing changed, could draw anytime and was waiting until the kids were a bit older and could tag a long. I might get a tag in the next four years, but everyone chasing the top units are going to bail so that is probably not likely. I think my beef mainly is focused on the sheep tag as that is the high price tag that you need big money to go out and hunt in Canada, Alaska or Mexico and I am not willing to mortgage the house or the kids college fund to do that.So at any point in time nripepi could you have drawn a license for either species ? Meaning you had the PPs to draw a license in some area, not just your chosen area(s)?
If so, sounds like you had opportunities to draw but chose not to. Wonder how that would play out in a lawsuit.
The regulations also state very clearly that 75% of the tags go to the preference point draw and have stated that for 3 decades.The regulations state very clearly you lose your points after not applying 2 consecutive years. No points should be reinstated...snooze you lose.
Regulations change...news flash.The regulations also state very clearly that 75% of the tags go to the preference point draw and have stated that for 3 decades.
Systems have changed in Arizona, Colorado, and Montana since I've been applying.
None of those state changes resulted in an individual like @nripepi losing >$5,000.
Pretty sure $50M is 18x larger than reality.No state has ever pulled this off on a $50M scale.
I suspect by current PP system you are talking about the current 90/10 and true PP?The total possible costs of every NR harmed is $2.79M. That includes every sportsperson for both Moose and Sheep who ever stood a chance of getting a license in the current PP system.
That math seems a little off, unless you're excluding anyone with less than 20 points? Even though I truly don't care all that much at this point. And ultimately this argument is not going to matter. I know that currently they pull in more than 3 million a year on point fees from NR for those 2 species. With over 10,000+ NRs buying points for each species. Twenty thousand times a 150.00 is 3 mil. Per year. It was less than that up through 2017, and then in 2018 they boosted the point fee on those two species to 150.00 each.Pretty sure $50M is 18x larger than reality.
The total possible costs of every NR harmed is $2.79M. That includes every sportsperson for both Moose and Sheep who ever stood a chance of getting a license in the current PP system. That includes PP costs for 22 years and associated CC fees for the PP.
Of course, there is some value in those points in a BP system, but no credit was given to offset- so this is the absolute maximum loss.
Everyone else who bought points is advantaged by a change to BP.
It does not include application for licenses- because the PP to BP change would not effect if you might have drawn a tag before.
Looked at total costs for 22 years. 400 moose and 200 sheep. The 4 year extension of the current system clears 150 or so. I suppose you could assume people would live longer (38 points makes for some pretty old hunters), or permits would climb, but it's pretty accurate, I think.That math seems a little off, unless you're excluding anyone with less than 20 points? Even though I truly don't care all that much at this point. And ultimately this argument is not going to matter. I know that currently they pull in more than 3 million a year on point fees from NR for those 2 species. With over 10,000+ NRs buying points for each species. Twenty thousand times a 150.00 is 3 mil. Per year. It was less than that up through 2017, and then in 2018 they boosted the point fee on those two species to 150.00 each.
I thought it was a bit higher- that would take it down to $2.3Mmax possible spent on points since inception
Sheep points $2020
Moose is $1750
There is time value of money with inflation, age and health of point holders to take into count. I would be 60 years old with 36 points, there are a bunch of people hunting sheep in their 70s right now. 22 might be a decent number for sheep, but probably 18 or less for moose.Pretty sure $50M is 18x larger than reality.
The total possible costs of every NR harmed is $2.79M. That includes every sportsperson for both Moose and Sheep who ever stood a chance of getting a license in the current PP system. That includes PP costs for 22 years and associated CC fees for the PP.
Of course, there is some value in those points in a BP system, but no credit was given to offset- so this is the absolute maximum loss.
Everyone else who bought points is advantaged by a change to BP.
It does not include application for licenses- because the PP to BP change would not effect if you might have drawn a tag before.
Moose was never 75-25...80-20.That's one way to look at it. Not sure where you got 135 tags per year- must have been at 75-25...
75% of 180 total tags is 135 sheep tags have been issued per year the last 2 years to those with the most preference points. I think this change to 0 tags allotted to the highest preference points affects people on average 20 years out if not longer depending on age. I will be 71 in 25 years and could have 47 points and could be able to hunt sheep.That's one way to look at it. Not sure where you got 135 tags per year- must have been at 75-25...
I am just taking 75% of the tags and giving them to those with most points as the law states will be done for the last 30 years.Gotcha- u r combining 90-10 and PP.
Theses numbers make the “I am going to sue”crowd look even silliermax possible spent on points since inception
Sheep points $2020
Moose is $1750
Get it through your head, NO ONE IS GETTING A REFUND!There is time value of money with inflation, age and health of point holders to take into count. I would be 60 years old with 36 points, there are a bunch of people hunting sheep in their 70s right now. 22 might be a decent number for sheep, but probably 18 or less for moose.
I think what is missing is the actual value of the tag, 25-40K for sheep, and the fact that there for every 1 non-resident that has a beef, there are 9 residents that do as well who the majority will not hunt sheep in Wyoming now that were on the cusp of drawing.
If I was advising Wyoming, I would recommend paying off anyone that wants their money back or going the Arizona route of 50/50 as Buzz suggested was fair. I bet they only lose 500K paying off those that don't want to convert versus a risk that the value of those points would bring on an open market if you drew the tag and could sell it.
135 tags per year x 20 years x 25K per tag = $67.5 million
You are probably correct that there will be no refunds, but they stated clearly what you were buying. They defined the type of point you bought as a preference point and explained in detail how the preference point system works, how if you stay in long enough you will draw a tag. It is all on their website in clear, easy to understand english.Get it through your head, NO ONE IS GETTING A REFUND!
You payed for points, you got points. The value of the points was never guaranteed.
Gotcha- u r combining 90-10 and PP.
You're wrong about that.BP-squared would not have happened if 90/10 on Big 5 hadn't happened first.
Wow. I was okay with 90/10 and 50/50 even though it would add 10-20 years for me getting a tag. I think 50 preference/50 bonus like Utah and Arizona is the most fair to all. Your son is better off with 25% random them 100% bonus squared for decades.@nripepi
Fair……. Life ain’t fair. The current system is not fair to anyone just getting in the game or even anyone with 0-15 points. It’s not fair to my son, and I have been buying points for him since he was eligible.
It’s only “fair” because it favors you. You had opportunity to use your points and you chose not to. That’s totally on you. Fairness has nothing to do with it.
Thank you Buzz. I have sent a bunch of emails and said it is on behalf of the residents.You're wrong about that.
Squared bonus points was brought up at the same time as 90-10 at the task force.
There were 2 very vocal proponents of the squared bonus points, Joe Schaffer and Pat Crank. They also thought the current preference point system wasn't working.
Even if 90-10 would have failed, there would have been a huge push to get to squared bonus points. Fact, and I'm not forced to guess because I attended the initial few meetings in person. I also testified in favor of 90-10, keeping the preference point system and going 50-50 random/points. Sy Gilliland with WOGA also testified to the same. During a break, he asked me before I testified if I would support 90-10, keep preference, and go 50-50.
He still wants that right now and he and I are both working on it.
Squared points were a concession to Schaffer...another fact.
When has a preference point system changed like this?It should be obvious to anyone that regulations change and there is no assurance of future value or use of points. Buyer beware.
Montana... completely scrubbed their point system in the 70's. My Dad was one year from 100% odds.When has a preference point system changed like this?
I assume you're a non-resident? If so,So I’m a simple fella, all these numbers and abbreviations are more than my simple mind can calculate. I have 16 points for sheep, should I be mad or happy for them to be squared? Thank you in advance.
I disagree. I hope I moves to 100% random and squared bonus points.Wow. I was okay with 90/10 and 50/50 even though it would add 10-20 years for me getting a tag. I think 50 preference/50 bonus like Utah and Arizona is the most fair to all. Your son is better off with 25% random them 100% bonus squared for decades.
Tell me, what you would think if you or your son had 20+ points? You would be totally fine with a huge change?
And no I did not choose not to draw, really close, but 1 point behind.
Yep. MT had a preference draw. Scrapped it. Went to bonus. Then bonus squared. NM had a preference system and scrapped it entirely. AZ has messed around with the preference and nonresident quotas/caps multiple times. It's pretty much assured that when enough have nots complain about being locked out until they outlive everyone ahead, the departments will make a change.
How much were points in Montana in the 70's and WTF does that have to do with a system being totally scrapped?Those old Montana and NM PP systems were both situations where the user got an almost free PP for having applied the prior year.
I see that as a different situation than the one where a state sold "preference" at $150+ per PP.
If WY had kept their PPs at $7, this would be a non-issue for me.
You cannot live long enough to draw under the PP system with 16 points. In current system, you only can draw in random.So what you’re saying is I have a chance.
You don't know that, and in any system there should be a random component.You cannot live long enough to draw under the PP system with 16 points. In current system, you only can draw in random.
In a BP system, your 16 points will give you some chance.
It all depends on age and health and applying. I think those with 15-16 have a decent chance if they are in it for the long haul.You don't know that, and in any system there should be a random component.
I was told when I was 5 years behind max points in Wyoming's preference system I wouldn't draw a preference sheep tag.
Wrong.....and glad I didn't listen to the turds that don't even apply.
Too many variables to say never.
Your son will likely never draw a ram tag in bonus squared. He could easily outlive everyone if he started young in a preference system. Have you drawn a ram tag? If so, how?I disagree. I hope I moves to 100% random and squared bonus points.
I would tell him the same thing. You bought points, he received points, the systems in place in the west for hunting are subject to change at any time. Deal with it and quit whining.
I was told I'd never draw desert sheep, musk ox, mountain goat, 2 of my 3 shiras bull moose tags, oryx, 2 rifle breaks elk tags in Montana in 3 years, back to back Arizona rifle bull tags....to name a few.Any reasonable assumptions would say never. I suppose 80% of people above him could drop out. Or sheep numbers explode 5X. Or Wyoming changes to a 50-50 R-NR ration in the future. So "never" is relative, I guess.
It's far less likely any of those things will happen than the odds of drawing a 16 point in a BP system. Which will have pretty poor odds, of course.
You can't predict human nature...why people every year draw preference tags with way less than max points for all kinds of tags.Ya, when there is a statistical chance, crazy things happen.
I drew a Unit 10 early rifle bull with 15 pts. It was 40-1 odds. My son, who applied separately with just 3 pts, drew that year as well! Many hundreds to one. Combined?- off the charts odds. But, it was a BP system, so we both actually had a chance.
Totally agree. I think these numbers will wane as time goes on. Those staying the course will do well.It all depends on age and health and applying. I think those with 15-16 have a decent chance if they are in it for the long haul.
Did MT run theirs for 3 decades before changing it? How long was New Mexico's in place, decades...never heard they ever had one? AZ's is sort of similar, but they went 50/50, not 100/0. I understand there is an issue, but it is impossible to solve, there are not enough sheep tags. Sure I am bias, but I and many others (mostly residents) played the game for a good portion of our hunting lives under 1 set of rules with no knowledge that it would likely change.Yep. MT had a preference draw. Scrapped it. Went to bonus. Then bonus squared. NM had a preference system and scrapped it entirely. AZ has messed around with the preference and nonresident quotas/caps multiple times. It's pretty much assured that when enough have nots complain about being locked out until they outlive everyone ahead, the departments will make a change.
The 60 year olds should have been paying attention and had max points and a sheep tag by now. Isn't fair to leave 15 year olds out of the draw either.Did MT run theirs for 3 decades before changing it? How long was New Mexico's in place, decades...never heard they ever had one? AZ's is sort of similar, but they went 50/50, not 100/0. I understand there is an issue, but it is impossible to solve, there are not enough sheep tags. Sure I am bias, but I and many others (mostly residents) played the game for a good portion of our hunting lives under 1 set of rules with no knowledge that it would likely change.
Don't even think about non-residents here....is it more fair to have a 15-year old resident hunting sheep in Unit 5 or have a 60-year old who has been applying for 22 years and was making plans on hunting sheep, talked to outfitters, poured over maps, scouted their unit....? That is what is going to happen, the resident who waited 22 years and who was about to draw likely will now never draw.
No tag for me, I would have to live a little over 150-160ish to draw in anything other than the random.Your son will likely never draw a ram tag in bonus squared. He could easily outlive everyone if he started young in a preference system. Have you drawn a ram tag? If so, how?
I agree 100% that is the most fair. If the 15 year old stays in the system until they are 60, they would have a good chance at preference side if they haven't drawn on the random side.The 60 year olds should have been paying attention and had max points and a sheep tag by now. Isn't fair to leave 15 year olds out of the draw either.
Easy solution is 50-50 tag split random/point system.
Okay, change the 60-year old to a 40-year oldThe 60 year olds should have been paying attention and had max points and a sheep tag by now. Isn't fair to leave 15 year olds out of the draw either.
Easy solution is 50-50 tag split random/point system.
I posted this from Huntin Fool before, but people are dropping out above 15 on the non-res side because of the cost and length of time likely to draw at a rate of 105 per year. Sure this was before 90/10, but the drop out rate probably increases with 90/10 if the system stays preference and if you are healthy and on the younger side you definitely have a chance:There are 2,137 people in front of 16pt holders. That's 140 years at 15 permits in PP. Man, a WHOLE lot would have to happen for a 16 pt holder to make it to the top.
Still should have been paying attention, a 40 year old should have nearly max points if they would have been paying attention, and for sure a tag.Okay, change the 60-year old to a 40-year old
I always find the “ I am 60 and deserve the tag or think of my preference points I deserve this tag” argument as stupid.I always find the "how will my kid/grandkids draw a tag or think of the future of hunting". I think most of us weren't waiting around for sheep/moose tags at 15 or 16, and we turned out alright.
More focus should be on telling them to become dentist/doctors/lawyers so they can just buy tags or trips to Canada.
I understand what you are saying and hear you, but when that 60 year old has spreadsheets every year and knows when he will draw and sticks it out, drops $1000s, waits for 25 years and makes plans to go in the next five years, then whoosh that dream of his for the past decade is gone just like that.I always find the “ I am 60 and deserve the tag or think of my preference points I deserve this tag” argument as stupid.
A lot of people don’t get moose or sheep tags and they turned out all right
max possible spent on points since inception
Sheep points $2020
Moose is $1750
When does the big class action suit start??I get over $5,000 as damages for @nripepi. But I understand how you calculate your smaller number ($3770) as you are not including app fees and the alleged 2.5% CC fees in his damages. Those were his true costs (damages) that I would include.
But either way you slice it, it's alot of money. $3770 or >$5,000.
And WY should feel dirty about keeping it.
So I’m a simple fella, all these numbers and abbreviations are more than my simple mind can calculate. I have 16 points for sheep, should I be mad or happy for them to be squared? Thank you in advance.
Laffin'...And it looks like they’re going to pass SF0088.
Laffin'...even louder.A bill needs to pass both house and senate, then goes to the executive for signature.
SF0088 passed 3rd reading 28 to 3.
Good luck quashing BP-squared on the house side when 90.3% of the senate approves of it.
2023-01-19 - Senate - (Y: 28 N: 3) [PASS]
I thought it was passing for sure?SF0088 Failed in the WY house.
H 3rd Reading:Failed 22-40-0-0-0
What NR fool with <20-22 points spends $438 this year for WY NR moose/sheep points? How could one spend that money if ANY portion of the logic involves an already oversaturated preference point system.
The legislature has significant motivation to act. ~$4M/year will not flow to WGF if an NR is paying attention when considering moose/sheep points in 2023.
10% NR allocation broke the existing PP system even earlier than it otherwise would have matured. The legislature has some time left in this session to prop up their Ponzi.
But the question is- how many bonus points did it take to bag her?I have a solution for everyone who has been churning and posting and caring so much about allocation, pricing, ponzis, whining, and….hunting in general, and would like a break. At least a solution that has worked for me.
Just find that cute lady at work or at the checkout counter or wherever to talk to about literally anything but all this! And keep it light, especially you married dogs like me. No scandal! Still, it focuses the mind in a much more pleasant direction! Wyoming who?
Ha Ha, that is all fellas!
The answer is always the same…. more than I got!But the question is- how many bonus points did it take to bag her?
By just a point or 2The answer is always the same…. more than I got!