NV FCFS Bot Discussion @Jan ’22 commissioner meeting

The AZ 90/10 doesn't fully apply, see lifetime license.

Yes, AZ & CO have some "residency agnostic" things going on - but it's not the premium tag money maker that NV FCFS can be for NV Residents this year!

Residents: Get your NV apps in now and draw those "bad" ram and bull tags in Positions 3-5. Then, SELL your TRK (Tag Return Knowledge) to Outfitters in 2022 so you can participate in NDOW’s game. PM me when results post and I will share with you the one Nevada outfitter that I already have who will PAY YOU for your TRK. Outfitters have the NR contacts who will value this inside information.

Upset? Email [email protected].

Watch the outfitter interests on the NV Wildlife Commission carefully. NRs who picked up these last minute premium tags at astounding rates often must hire an outfitter as they can't scout the unit. Outfitters and NRs love this secondary market for TRK. And they do NOT want 90/10 enforced on FCFS for obvious reasons. I don't blame them - I want their states to offer up corresponding gaping holes in their 90/10 also.

Sell FCFS to outfitters!.jpg
 

Will offer my services. $100 to get you a tag (I will need to login to your account). You give me the tags you are interested in. If I get one, I keep the $100. If I don’t, I’ll refund $50. :D

  • doz
  • Post #110 - First Come first serve details?
  • Sep 25, 2021
How did this go for you? Well enough that you don't want to lose NR clients for your 2022 side hustle?

Honestly, I don't hate the players. I played it too.

I am just wanting to see the game fixed.

And yes, part of fixing the game is fixing the overly generous resident return policy that is causing FCFS to convert these tags from Res to NR status.
 
Last edited:
How did this go for you? Well enough that you don't want to lose NR clients for your 2022 side hustle?

Honestly, I don't hate the players. I played it too.

I am just wanting to see the game fixed.

And yes, part of fixing the game is fixing the overly generous resident return policy that is causing FCFS to convert these tags from Res to NR status.
It was a joke clown face. The sad thing is, my family obtained 3 total tags (I got 2) doing it the good ole fashioned way. 1 browser and quick hands.

You are crying still because you didn't get a tag or what?
 
I am guilty of being a hard core player. I obtained far too many high quality tags (not Ram) for friends and family.

But now we find out that residents as a whole only obtained about 40% of the high quality FCFS tags when they were almost 100% returned by residents? Despite the fact that there were THOUSANDS of residents who told NDOW they wanted those tags in May?

If the returned tag was NR, then sure, give it a NR - exclusively. Keep that tag NR so they maintain their 10% allotment.

If the returned tag was Res - Kalkomey has all the apps in the database. Only show that FCFS tag to residents who had that tag on their app for the first 24/72 hours (for example). NOT difficult programming at all.

Or, leave the program as-is and watch residents game it further by selling TRK (Tag Return Knowledge).
 
I'm new to this whole FCFS program and did not use it last year. My question is why does it matter if a NR picked up a tag returned by a res? You said in an earlier post that the breakout for tags res/NR is not in one of the NV laws, the NSRs or whatever. So where did that 90% 10% split come from that you keep referencing?
 
I'm new to this whole FCFS program and did not use it last year. My question is why does it matter if a NR picked up a tag returned by a res? You said in an earlier post that the breakout for tags res/NR is not in one of the NV laws, the NSRs or whatever. So where did that 90% 10% split come from that you keep referencing?
Well most other states don’t want to give out more than 10% to NR so why should NV ?
 
Well most other states don’t want to give out more than 10% to NR so why should NV ?
the feeling I got from this thread was NV was giving out more than 10% to NR. So is the 10% cap to NR coming from public perception or is it an actual thing that NV follows?

I'm a res and new to this forum but not new to hunting. I've always heard of the 90/10 split. Just wondering if it is an actual law.
 
the feeling I got from this thread was NV was giving out more than 10% to NR. So is the 10% cap to NR coming from public perception or is it an actual thing that NV follows?

I'm a res and new to this forum but not new to hunting. I've always heard of the 90/10 split. Just wondering if it is an actual law.
I'm trying to research that now. Supposedly, as per our resident complainer, it's an "internal policy."
 
I've always heard of the 90/10 split. Just wondering if it is an actual law.
Great question. And my apologies to any I have misled with verbiage such as "violating 10% NR cap". I believe many of us use the term "10% NR cap" regardless whether that concept is born from state statute (NRS), administrative code (NAC), commission regulation (CR) or agency practice/tradition.

NV does have a "tradition" of applying 90/10 on NR quotas for the main draw. Nevada should apply that same 90/10 tradition to alternate tag processes so that residents cannot game the system by selling TRK (Tag Return Knowledge). I am quite sure the 10% NR cap is not in NRS or NAC. I have also not yet seen a CR expressing the 10% NR cap. My theory is that each year, when the CR for big game quotas is drafted, the commission informally adopts 90/10 by virtue of the fact that they expressly give 10% of the NR tags to NRs in the charts for each hunt code.

If an NR could not have obtained the tag in the draw, they should also not be able to obtain it later. This is the exact logic the commission used for why RM BHS and RM goat would be Res only at FCFS. Why use a different policy for all other hunt codes when that situation dovetails with an overly generous resident return policy to cause RES tags to convert to NR?

NAC 502.421 and CR 22-02 both currently clearly allow NDOW to be issuing tags via both the old "eligible alternate" (position 1) call list and via electronic FCFS in a resident agnostic fashion. The NV Wildlife Commission is the author of both NAC 502 and their CRs - so they can rewrite that verbiage to fix the problem that they created with their first version.

NR did NOT EVEN APPLY in draw.jpg
 
Great question. And my apologies to any I have misled with verbiage such as "violating 10% NR cap". I believe many of us use the term "10% NR cap" regardless whether that concept is born from state statute (NRS), administrative code (NAC), commission regulation (CR) or agency practice/tradition.

NV does have a "tradition" of applying 90/10 on NR quotas for the main draw. Nevada should apply that same 90/10 tradition to alternate tag processes so that residents cannot game the system by selling TRK (Tag Return Knowledge). I am quite sure the 10% NR cap is not in NRS or NAC. I have also not yet seen a CR expressing the 10% NR cap. My theory is that each year, when the CR for big game quotas is drafted, the commission informally adopts 90/10 by virtue of the fact that they expressly give 10% of the NR tags to NRs in the charts for each hunt code.

If an NR could not have obtained the tag in the draw, they should also not be able to obtain it later. This is the exact logic the commission used for why RM BHS and RM goat would be Res only at FCFS. Why use a different policy for all other hunt codes when that situation dovetails with an overly generous resident return policy to cause RES tags to convert to NR?

NAC 502.421 and CR 22-02 both currently clearly allow NDOW to be issuing tags via both the old "eligible alternate" (position 1) call list and via electronic FCFS in a resident agnostic fashion. The NV Wildlife Commission is the author of both NAC 502 and their CRs - so they can rewrite that verbiage to fix the problem that they created with their first version.

View attachment 72492
Let me see if I have this straight; so now rather than "internal policy," it's a "theory" that the commission uses a "tradition?" :oops:

Other than a figment of this "theory," is there any proof of this "tradition" actually being implemented, like maybe one of these: "by virtue of the fact that they expressly give 10% of the NR tags to NRs in the charts for each hunt code."

blowingsmoke.gif
 
Let me see if I have this straight; so now rather than "internal policy," it's a "theory" that the commission uses a "tradition?" :oops:

I share in your desire to see the actual 90/10 verbiage that guides the NV draw. I cannot find that.

Only proof I offer is: many, many years of tag quota data where the NR tag number comes out to exactly 10% of the total.
 
Only proof I offer is: many, many years of tag quota data where the NR tag number comes out to exactly 10% of the total.
Let's see that proof then. Just show us one or two of those so called charts or whatever it is where they provide the counts.
 
Let's see that proof then. Just show us one or two of those so called charts or whatever it is where they provide the counts.
OW-I am sure a guy could look up NAC and find the information if he was willing. I am not as I would rather waste time reading all of this conspiracy THEORY BS.. You are correct-it was internal policy and now it's a theory. FCFS is not the starting point for the 90/10 to go out the door. The 90/10 is only for the main draw and then it's over. The second big game draw even allows for residents and non-residents to apply for mule deer, black bear, elk, mountain goat and bighorn sheep tags that are left over after the MAIN draw. Then comes the FCFS and that's for any remaining tags left without a eligible alternate with the exception of junior mule deer, rocky mountain bighorn and mountain goat tags which are only available to Nevada residents. I like the FCFS system and like many have mentioned-it's new and I am sure they will work it all out when it comes to BOTS and etc. As far as residents or non-residents obtaining tags through the draw or FCFS and then selling them-that's all BS as well.
 
OW-I am sure a guy could look up NAC and find the information if he was willing. I am not as I would rather waste time reading all of this conspiracy THEORY BS.. You are correct-it was internal policy and now it's a theory. FCFS is not the starting point for the 90/10 to go out the door. The 90/10 is only for the main draw and then it's over. The second big game draw even allows for residents and non-residents to apply for mule deer, black bear, elk, mountain goat and bighorn sheep tags that are left over after the MAIN draw. Then comes the FCFS and that's for any remaining tags left without a eligible alternate with the exception of junior mule deer, rocky mountain bighorn and mountain goat tags which are only available to Nevada residents. I like the FCFS system and like many have mentioned-it's new and I am sure they will work it all out when it comes to BOTS and etc. As far as residents or non-residents obtaining tags through the draw or FCFS and then selling them-that's all BS as well.

Seems to be lost on people. 90/10 is for the main draw, FCFS is not a draw.
 
Let's see that proof then. Just show us one or two of those so called charts or whatever it is where they provide the counts.

See attached Res/NR pages of tag allocation for "antlered elk". On balance, I think it shows that NV adheres to 90/10 for the draw.

I think NRs have accepted 90/10 for the draw for years.

The much more exciting news for NRs is that they get those 10% of the draw tags, and now are ALSO getting ~60% of the high quality portion of tags on FCFS. So now, low/no point NRs should just bypass the Nevada main draw altogether as a shrewd application strategy. And instead, use only the FCFS gravy train because NRs are likely going to completely reverse the 90/10 paradigm altogether for FCFS 2022. That's right, a complete reversal to 10/90 (R/NR) for NV FCFS 2022 for Rams and Bull Elk.

Why give NDOW money every year when you can use FCFS and only give NDOW money on the years NDOW gives the NR a great Ram/Bull tag?

A real budget buster for NDOW - but a very smart move for low/no point NR who understands the game.

20220325_165554.jpg


20220325_165528.jpg
 
Let me see if I have this straight; so now rather than "internal policy," it's a "theory" that the commission uses a "tradition?" :oops:

Other than a figment of this "theory," is there any proof of this "tradition" actually being implemented, like maybe one of these: "by virtue of the fact that they expressly give 10% of the NR tags to NRs in the charts for each hunt code."

View attachment 72497
has anyone else besides jdp010 tried to ask NDOW for that information? Seems like if it exists, it would be something accessible to the public. Most of my interactions going in to an office have been good from NDOW with my questions getting answered and the ladies at the front desk being helpful.
 
has anyone else besides jdp010 tried to ask NDOW for that information? Seems like if it exists, it would be something accessible to the public. Most of my interactions going in to an office have been good from NDOW with my questions getting answered and the ladies at the front desk being helpful.
I've sent an email to an old contact I had at NDOW but haven't heard back from him.
 
A resident was given the tag. He returned it too close to the hunt. It was given out on a FCFS basis. And you are still crying about NR getting more than 10%...............

So many tags given back by residents within 14 days of the hunt. Get upset with those guys who didn't turn them in sooner and give others a chance who were residents (alternate list).
 
... Get upset with those guys who didn't turn them in sooner and give others a chance who were residents (alternate list).

Except NDOW also is not respecting 90/10 with the old (and still current) > 14 day alternate manual call list. Notice how "residency" is not mentioned in NAC 502.421.

Which is probably why it was natural for NDOW to continue that "resident agnostic" practice with electronic FCFS. It took electronic FCFS for outsiders to notice that NDOW had already been violating 90/10 with their reissue process.

At least when it happened with only the call list, any NR that benefitted was the very next person in the draw order and they participated in the draw process and contributed funds that year with a base license and fees. With electronic FCFS, a smart NR will now bypass thousands of applicants in the draw order and will not even need to participate in the draw. No guaranteed money to NDOW until that NR has the tag in their cart. And only then, will that very smart NR add their first ever $156 base NV hunting license to cart during the 5 minute check out process.

Every bull and ram dreamer in the USA who has never applied in Nevada has now been woken up and will use NV FCFS in 2022.

The commission can fix both of these alternate processes with appropriate edits to NAC 502.421 et seq.

All of these tags will still get hunted even if we respect 90/10. They will stay up for a mean time of a few seconds instead of a few milliseconds. A person of the same residency will be the beneficiary and the 90/10 concept will be respected.
 
How can the alternate not be by residency? Everyone applies for either resident or non resident tags. How can a non resident be an alternate for a resident tag when they aren't even in the same draw? This is why residency isn't mentioned, it is implied when you participant in the draw.

You should focus more on the bots, a single browser and the liberal tag turn in times. You are trying to fix a symptom rather than a root cause.
 
NAC 502.421  Alternate list; procedure to refill quota. (NRS 501.105, 501.181, 502.160, 502.175, 502.219)

1.  The Department shall cause the computer to generate an alternate list for tags after the drawing for a hunt is completed. An alternate list must consist solely of each applicant who indicated on his or her electronic application for a tag pursuant to NAC 502.4175 a desire to be placed on the list. Even if the first person selected for an alternate list has the same drawing number as the last person selected to receive a tag in the drawing, the Department shall accept those selections as final.

2.  If the return of tags pursuant to NAC 502.422 or 502.42695 reduces the number of tags awarded for an area and season to less than the quota for that area and season, the Department shall refill the quota by awarding tags from the alternate list, unless there are fewer than 14 business days remaining until the opening day for that season.

3.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, in awarding tags from an alternate list for a hunt, the Department shall issue the tag to the eligible applicant appearing on the list who:

(a) Has the drawing number with the highest priority; and

(b) Indicated as the applicant’s first choice the area and season for which the quota is being filled.

4.  If the Department is unable to collect any fee that is required to be submitted with an application for a hunting license or tag because the method of payment is rejected during the processing of the fee for the license or tag, the Department shall, if more than 14 business days remain until the opening day for the hunt, select an eligible applicant from the alternate list for the hunt and season who:

(a) Has the drawing number with the highest priority; and

(b) Has indicated as his or her first choice the area and season for which the quota is being filled.

5.  Eligible applicants will be displayed on the alternate list as individual persons even though they applied for tags as a party in the draw. The order in which such persons are displayed on the alternate list is random and final.

6.  The Department shall maintain a record of each applicant selected from an alternate list pursuant to this section.

7.  As used in this section, “drawing number” means a number assigned by the computer to an application to denote the priority it will receive in a drawing.

(Added to NAC by Bd. of Wildlife Comm’rs, eff. 3-7-91; A 10-12-94; R133-01, 12-17-2001, eff. 1-1-2002; R137-03, 1-20-2004; R156-05, 2-23-2006; A by Dep’t of Wildlife by R110-11, 3-9-2012; A by Bd. of Wildlife Comm’rs by R159-12, 12-20-2012; R029-17, 12-19-2017)

NAC 502.4215  Application for tags remaining after issuance of tags by computerized system and alternate list. (NRS 501.105, 501.181, 502.160)  After tags have been issued for a season by using the computerized system of drawing and alternate list, the Department shall provide all eligible hunters with an opportunity to apply for any remaining tags electronically. The Department shall act upon applications for those tags in the order received.

(Added to NAC by Bd. of Wildlife Comm’rs, eff. 3-7-91; A 10-26-93; R137-03, 1-20-2004; R113-14, 6-26-2015)

NAC 502.422  Cancellation of tag issued in error; return of tag; provision of refund. (NRS 501.105, 501.181, 502.160, 502.219, 502.250)

1.  The Department may cancel a tag and provide a refund if the Department issues the tag in error.

2.  The Department shall provide a refund if the holder of a tag:

(a) Or a person to whom the holder is related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity dies, as verified by a certificate of death;

(b) Or a person to whom the holder is related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity incurs a disability, as verified in writing by a physician, which prevents him or her from hunting during the season for which the tag was issued;

(c) Is serving in the Armed Forces of the United States and is transferred, as verified by a copy of his or her orders or other proof satisfactory to the Department, to a location which makes it impracticable for the holder to hunt in the area for which the tag was issued; or

(d) Is a recipient of a Dream Tag issued pursuant to NRS 502.219 and returns the drawn tag to the Department pursuant to NAC 502.42695,

Ê and, except as otherwise provided in NAC 502.336, his or her tag is received by the Department at least 1 business day before the opening day of the season for which the tag was issued. If the holder obtained his or her hunting license with his or her tag, the hunting license may be returned with the tag.

3.  If a refund is provided pursuant to subsection 1 or 2, the Department shall:

(a) Return all the fees submitted with the application for the tag except the fees required pursuant to NRS 502.253 and NAC 502.331; and

(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2 of NAC 502.4225, treat the recipient of the refund, with respect to his or her eligibility to obtain a tag and to be awarded a bonus point, as if the tag had not been issued and the applicant was unsuccessful.

4.  If a tag for any subspecies of bighorn sheep or mountain goat is returned for a reason other than the reasons set forth in subsection 1 or 2, the Department shall:

(a) If the tag is received not later than July 15, return all the fees submitted with the application for the tag except the fees required pursuant to NRS 502.253 and NAC 502.331; and

(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2 of NAC 502.4225, treat the recipient of the refund, with respect to his or her eligibility to obtain a tag and to be awarded a bonus point, as if the tag had not been issued and the applicant was unsuccessful.

5.  If a tag for antelope, bighorn sheep, mountain goat, bear, turkey, deer, moose or elk is returned for a reason other than the reasons set forth in subsection 1 or 2, and if the tag is received at least 1 business day before the opening day of the season for which the tag was issued, the Department:

(a) Shall, except as otherwise provided in subsection 2 of NAC 502.4225, treat the applicant, with respect to his or her eligibility to obtain a tag and to be awarded a bonus point, as if the tag had not been issued and the applicant was unsuccessful; and

(b) Shall not return any fee paid for the tag.

6.  Except as otherwise provided in NAC 502.421, the Department is not required to refill a quota for the issuance of tags if the application of this section reduces the number of tags issued to less than a quota.

(Added to NAC by Bd. of Wildlife Comm’rs, eff. 3-7-91; A 10-26-93; 10-12-94; R114-05, 10-31-2005; R156-05, 2-23-2006; R068-08, 8-26-2008; A by Dep’t of Wildlife by R110-11, 3-9-2012; A by Bd. of Wildlife Comm’rs by R159-12, 12-20-2012; R029-17, 12-19-2017)
 
Talked to NDOW today and was told there won’t be anymore multiple browsers open during FCFS tag time.
I got the same response. They are aware of the issues with BOTS (I just learned what the heck that meant over the last few weeks) and open browsers. Seems like a legitimate system to me from what I have read and researched. Maybe I am wrong and I have been many times, however seems like it's all there in black and white.
 
. They are aware of the issues with BOTS...

Enforcing 90/10 for NV FCFS can prevent bots and click-farms.

Generally, residents of NV do not pay $200K for elk and desert ram auction tags, correct? Of course not – as they know they will draw a great ram/bull tag eventually. This is the same reason that a resident is much less likely to build a bot or fund a click-farm at a tag application service.

The high NR demand and wealth funds auction tags and that is also the only viable funding source for bots. There simply aren’t enough wealthy NR clients for a bot service or click farm if 90/10 is respected.

No NR ever returns a NV ram tag – so why fund a bot or click-farm to snag that non-existent tag for an NR? But if the NR can convert a ram tag from RES to NR – that is a process worth automating and profiting from.

NDOW created this process that is allowing even more guys to profit off premium tags.
 
Last edited:

Nevada Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Big Bucks & Bulls Timberline Outfitters Guide Service

Customized and high quality eastern Nevada trophy hunts for mule deer, elk and antelope.

Western Wildlife Adventures

We offer some excellent mule deer and elk hunts in northeast Nevada.

Currant Creek Outfitters

Nevada, big bucks and big bulls! We hunt for quality not quantity.

Nevada Outfitters & Guides Association

Find guides and outfitters for mule deer, elk, sheep, chuckar, fishing, & more!

SilverGrand Outfitters

Successfully guiding in Nevada for many years. Mule deer, elk, antelope and bighorn sheep hunts.

Hidden Lake Outfitters

Specializing in trophy mule deer hunts along with elk, mountain goat, antelope and mountain lion.

G&J Outdoors

Full time outfitter with 20+ years hunting mule deer, sheep, elk, antelope, lion and chukar.

Mountain Man Outfitters

Offering world class mule deer hunts in some of the most productive units in Nevada.

Nevada High Desert Outfitters

Rocky mountain goats, desert, rocky and california bighorn, mule deer, antelope and elk hunts.

Urge 2 Hunt

If you want an unguided hunt but can't draw your tags, you need to call us.

White River Guide Service

50 years of guiding experience! Mule deer, elk, sheep and cougar.

Back
Top Bottom