History of Utah limited entry

K

krazy

Member
Messages
85
I'm hoping you all can educate me on the history of the limited entry draw system in Utah. I'm too young to remember what the system looked like before the current iteration. I assume that 23 years ago it was different (I say 23 because I think that's the max number of points one could have accrued by now).

Part two... has the current system improved quality overall? Has it improved opportunity?

Part three... what bugs me, is that since I wasn't able to put in from the beginning, I am behind the curve of the point creep. I'm not sure of a solution to this problem, though.

Any thoughts are appreciated. This may have been addressed before, so I appreciate your patience.
 
I assume you are a nonresident as I am? I only put in for LE units and I started putting in about 15 years ago. I have only 2 interests: elk and deer. Elk is by far my biggest hope/interest. I felt like I was getting to the point where I might have a decent chance of drawing an elk tag when the rug was pulled out from under me. They stopped us putting in for only 1 species and allow us to put in for all. Now on the surface, that sounds good. However what happened is that my odds of drawing an elk tag went in the toilet.

Not only that, but even though you can put in for multiple species, you can only draw one tag. So if you draw one, you are out of the running for all other LE tags

What I wish is that they let us apply for as many POINTS as we want, so they get their money, but they would only let us apply for one tag. So they get their money, and I get better odds for the species I really want. I realize that some people like to be in the running for multiple species, but if you only apply for 2 animals, like I do, your odds are much worse on a specific species, and a little worse overall of even drawing a tag at all.

BTW, they only let residents put in for one species. If it is such a good deal to apply for multiple species, why don't they let the residents have the same deal?

As far as the quality, don't know first hand, but seems to be pretty dang good for those lucky enough to draw.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
Prior to 1993( I think ) there was no bonus points. It was all random and we could apply for all species. Not sure what year they limited us to one species. Seems like every thing kept getting more and more restrictive about the time SFW came into existence. HMMM
 
The current system started in 1993 I believe, but there wad a point system before that, they dropped everyone's points and made started the new one. And they have modified that a few times
 
I am young enough that the current system is all I've been part of, so I don't know what it was like back before I was 12.

As far as quality, that depends on what type of quality you mean. Some would say "yes" because lucky tag holders for premium units are killing a few 400" bulls and a few 200" mule deer every year. Most of those are tags that are bought (not drawn), with guides commissioned to find them. If that is your idea of improved quality, then you would be in the "yes" category.

Others would say "no" to the quality because what good is having 8 year old bulls and 6 year old bucks if only a few elites can even hunt them..?? If you look at general season areas, many would say that there are no "quality" hunts because buck to doe ratios are poor, and age objectives are low.

The Limited Entry system is not intended to benefit the majority of hunters, or the animal herds we pursue. It is intended to "grow" trophy animals on public lands, in an effort to raise large amounts of money FOR private interest groups, guiding services, and in the end, the DWR.

Unfortunately, as I stated, it's the system I've grown up with, and it doesn't seem like it will change any time soon to benefit all. :-(

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
Piper, was it a do over on points or waiting periods? I think I remember drawing antelope in 92 and being surprised they let me apply the next year. Go back 10 more years and we were able to purchase a buck tag for archery and rifle . Two bucks in one year over the counter.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-16 AT 09:51AM (MST)[p]"Solutions" to the problem are not easy to come by. Utahns want our cake and to eat it too. We all like putting in for a Limited Entry hunt, but still want our general season tags as well. The first, and hardest change, would be to keep LE hunts and GS hunts COMPLETELY SEPARATE. In other words, you can only put in for one or the other, not both. I've been posting this similar plan for years, and it's a hard pill to swallow, but here's some RESIDENT numbers to consider:

Last year, there were 35,598 people that put in for 1,429 LE Deer Hunts. There were 118,228 people put in for 64,405 General Season Deer tags. Assuming all 35,598 also put in for General Season permits (I know they didn't), if they had been forced to choose only LE, there would have only been 82,630 people putting in for 64,405 GS tags, increasing the GS draw rate from 54.5% to 77.9%. That is one improvement we would all like to see.

A portion of those 35,598 LE people include thousands of people who hunt on private lands with general season tags (maybe 5%- 1,780.?). I believe that most of them would no longer choose the LE pathway as their odds of drawing a GS tag on the private land that they own/hunt/operate will increase, giving them greater opportunity, and the quality of deer on those lands is often similar to many of the LE Deer units. The "sting" of having to choose for those individuals would be quite tame. If that were to happen, then the point creep in the LE system begins to reduce. (I realize the GS draw percentage would dip, ever so slightly, possibly to 72.9%) (An increase from 82,630 to 84,410 in the GS draw) (and a reduction in LE applicants to 33,818).

In addition, I believe you would see a large number of individuals sporting between 0 and 4 LE Bonus Points choose to abandon the LE pathway in favor of the GS pathway. Current numbers between 0-4 LE BPs is 18,962 (more than half of all LE applicants). Making some assumptions, as many as 8,634 of those individuals would move to the GS pathway, raising that number to 93,044; 69.2% draw rate. But this would also reduce the LE applicants to 25,184- increasing the overall draw rate from 4% to 5.7%

So, to this point, we have increased the draw rate for GS tags from 54.5 to 69.2, and increase of 27%. And the LE draw rate from 4 to 5.7, an increase of 42.5%. These percentages represent increased opportunity. On one hand it is increased opportunity for a tag every year in GS, or an increase in opportunity on LE units, reducing point creep (and possibly eliminating it- can you imagine tags being awarded at a rate commensurate with new applicants..??)

Now, to further reduce LE point creep, CWMU permits (purchased, not drawn) need to come into play. Currently, an individual can put in for LE units, and if they don't draw, they can purchase a CWMU tag from the CWMU operator. Now, unfortunately, I can't seem to find how many CWMU tags are given out to CWMU owners/operators to sell. I did find the number of drawn tags in the harvest reports here: https://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/2015/2015_le_oial_hr.pdf

I would implement a rule that treated purchased CWMU permits exactly as CWMU permits that public hunters put in for currently- you can't do both an LE and CWMU application, it has to be one or the other. For example, if you have to choose between GS or LE as I am proposing, current CWMU draw permits would be considered like LE tags, as they are now. However, if you put in for a GS tag, or an LE tag and you don't draw, you are ineligible to purchase a CWMU tag for that same species in that same year. Because there are no current numbers posted about CWMU permit purchasers, it is hard to say just how many guys/girls are putting in for LE units, getting their "Unsuccessful", and then buying a CWMU tag. But, I think we could all agree it does happen. If not drawing an LE or GS tag made an individual ineligible to purchase CWMU tags, they would likely opt OUT of the LE and GS pools and simply plan on buying their CWMU permit each year. Though I have no numbers for purchased CWMU tags, there were 1,864 CWMU draw tags last year, and that is only a percentage of the total CWMU tags given out to be sold by owners/operators. I think no matter how many the actual number is, it is obvious that it would remove hundreds if not thousands of people from both the GS and LE permits pools.

I would leave auction and expo tags as they are, for the time being. Gotta give baby her bottle. wink wink, nudge nudge.

I think the same system could be implemented with elk as well.

So, there is my long-winded idea for reducing point creep, and increasing opportunity. It involves drastic changes that I don't think will ever take place. But I think it would increase opportunity, increase quality/quantity of deer/bucks, and give everyone that is monetarily supported by hunting exactly what they are getting now anyway.

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
I'm not sure about the LE but back then a general rifle deer tag was included in your "over the counter" big game license. It was good state wide on all general units. If you wanted to use your tag for the archery or muzzleloader seasons. You paid $5-10 each for archery permit or muzzleloader permit, thus making your general rifle buck tag good for multiple seasons.

I miss those days.
 
I'm not sure about the LE but back then a general rifle deer tag was included in your "over the counter" big game license. It was good state wide on all general units. If you wanted to use your tag for the archery or muzzleloader seasons. You paid $5-10 each for archery permit or muzzleloader permit, thus making your general rifle buck tag good for multiple seasons.

I miss those days.
 
There have been LE type hunts for decades, but they have become more and more prevalent. One trend has been to manage for higher age classes or higher male numbers in the units. The emphasis on antler size will continue to reduce or suppress the opportunity to hunt.

When the point system started people where under the impression that they would draw at some point-- which is essentially true. Those lucky enough to be eligible at the arbitrary time the points started will/did draw. But here we are, 23 years into the point system and many units/hunts will take multiple lifetimes to draw. Sure the points work for someone with an extreme high number of points, but the rest of the applicants will have to out live the competition to draw a tag.

There are no easy solutions. Someone will hate whatever idea is put forth, just like some hate the current system.
-Cap points at 25. That way people can catch up to the top level, but still rewards long-term dedication.
-Preference points for all tags that take less than 5 years to draw
-6+ years are on the hybrid system of 50-50
Or just throw points out the window like Idaho or go to a squared system like Nevada.

I can't imagine the current system having people with 52 points....
 
Squaring points (like Nevada) doesn't solve any of the problems of a point system. People feel like it rewards long-term applicants while allowing everybody a chance to draw, but the current Utah system does that already.

If 9 points gets you 82 tickets in the bucket (9x9+1), but everybody else with 9 points has 82 tickets as well... then you still have the same odds as those with 9 points. Now those with 10 points have 101 tickets in the bucket and those with 8 points have 65 tickets in the bucket but all you've really accomplished is a lot more tickets in the bucket. If 100 people apply for 10 tags, you will have 90 unlucky people regardless of how many tickets went into the bucket before the drawing.

Unless you decrease the applicants or increase the tags, you can't actually change overall odds of drawing. There will always be the same number of happy hunters and the same number of sad hunters on the day of the draw.

The problem is the Nevada system still achieves the negatives of: 1) harming the youth hunter with an unfair disadvantage caused by nothing but their age and the arbitrary date at which the point system started; 2) incentivizing hunters to apply for every tag possible, every year possible, to prevent missing out on a potential bonus point. This guarantees the maximum number of applicants, unlike Idaho and New Mexico which don't "punish" people that miss a year of applications due to various reasons.

Ryan Hatfield wrote an excellent article on point systems a while back that everybody should read, he has a great way of orating what many of us believe.

Grizzly
 
In reply to Grizzly...

You said, "The problem is the Nevada system still achieves the negatives of: 1) harming the youth hunter with an unfair disadvantage caused by nothing but their age and the arbitrary date at which the point system started..."

This is the point that I personally don't care for, that is the same in Utah. I started putting in for LE hunts in Utah as soon as I was old enough. I'll likely never draw a tag on a premium unit in Utah. I'd be OK with that if the playing field were level, but because of the disadvantage of being born later, that playing field is tilted.

I know, I am whining. I'll settle for a lesser unit and still have a great time. Then I think of my son... he's only 3 right now, and he may never draw anything. Guess we better take up water fowl hunting.
 
Grizzly,

NV has a great point system. Your right squaring pts doesn't improve your odds when compared to those that have the same amount of pts but either does any point system. It does give you a weighted advantage to those who have put in the longest without drawing & that's what a point system should do.
The random draw we have in Wyoming is a select few draw tags (some fairly frequently) & then others that go decades. You can say this is the best & it is if your lucky. It always amazes me that the guys that luck out and draw frequently are most opposed to a point system in Wyoming.
I completely understand & agree that point systems don't improve odds & all they do is straighten out the order in which people are drawn. I think measures like pick a species, waiting periods, & pick a season; measures that reduce hunters or increase tags (without hurting the resource) are also important. For the record actually improving odds are more important to me than a point system.
The youth argument in invalid. Your kids (that live in Utah) will be lined up for a premium elk tag long before my kids (that live in WY) will. My kid has the same crappy odds (in most cases <4%) their whole life. I know several people who have never drawn a LQ elk or deer tag in Wyoming. That doesn't happen with a pt system. Kids don't need to be killing trophy animals anyway. My 7 year old will shoot a bunch of cows, small bucks & bulls before I get to concerned about him hunting premium LQ areas.
 
Krazy,

The fact is you will draw a quality elk tag when you get enough pts. A quick glance at the 2016 Utah drawing odds report shows that most LQ tags take 10-16pts. A handful of units take 20+ points.
I have 16 years of putting in for a Wyoming LQ elk tag and have yet to draw a tag and I'm no closer than when I moved to Wyoming.
I have a good friend that has 25 years without drawing a LQ elk tag.
 
Feduptwo, subscribe to hunterstrailhead and take a look at the odds for a premium elk tag. My kids will literally never have a premium elk tag. The point creep is too big and growing too fast. Plus, they can't hunt anything in the interim to get them excited to hunt whatsoever.

At least kids in WY can hunt quality OTC hunts while they grow up and try and get lucky.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

Grizzly
 
>I am young enough that the
>current system is all I've
>been part of, so
>I don't know what it
>was like back before I
>was 12.
>
>As far as quality, that depends
>on what type of quality
>you mean. Some would say
>"yes" because lucky tag holders
>for premium units are killing
>a few 400" bulls and
>a few 200" mule deer
>every year. Most of those
>are tags that are bought
>(not drawn), with guides commissioned
>to find them. If that
>is your idea of improved
>quality, then you would be
>in the "yes" category.
>
>Others would say "no" to the
>quality because what good is
>having 8 year old bulls
>and 6 year old bucks
>if only a few elites
>can even hunt them..?? If
>you look at general season
>areas, many would say that
>there are no "quality" hunts
>because buck to doe ratios
>are poor, and age objectives
>are low.
>
>The Limited Entry system is not
>intended to benefit the majority
>of hunters, or the animal
>herds we pursue. It is
>intended to "grow" trophy animals
>on public lands, in an
>effort to raise large amounts
>of money FOR private interest
>groups, guiding services, and in
>the end, the DWR.
>
>Unfortunately, as I stated, it's the
>system I've grown up with,
>and it doesn't seem like
>it will change any time
>soon to benefit all. :-(


Anyone that says the quality of animals hasn't improved is delusional, 25 years ago a 300 inch bull was considered a big bull in most of the LE units of the state, and a 350-400 was almost unheard of. I see several 300+ bulls taken off of the general season units every year.

And the guides taking most of the bigger animals is a product of the environment, those animals are still there for any one of the "regular Joe blows" out there most just don't put in the time and effort to find them.

The simple fact of the matter is we have a much higher demand than we have supply, some of this could be alleviated at the expense of quality but even still there would be a waiting list.

Personally I am in favor of doing away with the point systems, but that could be because I have drawn my elk and deer tags in the last 5 years so I'm pretty much starting over anyway.



Jake H. BIG BONE HUNTING Page on Facebook.
458738e374dfcb10.jpg
 
Personally I think that you should be able to put in for more than one LE unit if you want to. If you get a assigned a number that would get you a tag in a unit that wasn't your first choice you could keep or decline the tag. Also, I believe that anyone who has not drawn a an LE tag should be given some type of preference over someone who has previously drawn an LE tag. If would create a 3 tier point system but if would at least make it more plausible that everyone would most likely draw out eventually.
 
I'm an old guy who has lived through the no LE units to the current system. Here is my memory:
When I was a boy everyone went deer hunting, including grandma. There were 200,000 Utah tag holders on the mountain on opening day and for the first few hours it sounded like a war had erupted. That is true because World War II had ended several years earlier and deer had literally not been hunted for a decade. Hunting was more of a camping trip for deer meat and numbers were exceptionally high and despite the fact that the effective range of most weapons was 150 yards, lots of deer were killed.

Fast forward a couple of decades. Deer numbers had plummeted and many of the 200,000 tag holders, became more interested in antlers and less interested in meat. The average success rate had dropped to 20% or less and most deer killed were yearlings or does. (yes either sex hunting was legal).

Some units got so much pressure that low numbers caused the DWR to close units for 5 or 6 years to rebuild herds. When those units rebounded the DWR could see the writing on the wall if they opened these units to general hunting. Everyone would go there and the deer would be slaughtered. So they implemented a Limited Entry hunt that you could apply to get a tag for. Those initial LE units got such favorable reviews from the lucky tag holders that many hunters called for more LE units to give more hunters a chance at big bucks.
Other efforts were implemented to improve deer quality, such as antler restrictions, etc. but those failed miserably because too many hunters shot first and counted points later.
Elk units and OIL tags have always been limited because of low animal numbers, but when elk herds exploded general season hunting was allowed in some areas.

There you have it from my old feeble mind.

Oh and by the way, I like it the way it is now rather than in the days when I was fighting to find a two point.
 
Grizzly I looked at the odds. Currently (San Juan early season rifle elk) there are 19 tags with 1811 1st choice applicants for true odds of 1.04%. It would take 95 years to draw this tag except for a couple things. People die & apply for different units. If your kids were patient enough to draw one of these tags they would have it before they were 50 yrs old. A long time I agree but the alternative is random.
The same (ha 100) 1.04% in Wyoming my kids would have a tag, eh never. Unless they got incredibly lucky.

Utah does a great job of making the odds as good as possible for residents with 5yr waiting periods, pick a species & pick a weapon. The only thing I would change about Utah's system is squaring pts to give a little more weight to those who have applied the longer.
Utah's problem is the gigantic amount of resident applicants for the very few tags. If this were done in a Random draw it would be horrid.
I won't disagree that Wyoming has incredible General season hunting. So does CO. Get your kids hunting these states it makes the long wait between LQ tags more palatable.
 
feduptwo, and now they're trying to change it where tags can be given to somebody else as a "mentor" which just means grandma will start building points so grandkids can jump to the front of the line.

Instead of people declaring they're too old to hunt, they just give the tag to somebody else so we have less attrition.

My grandpa passed away with a pile of unused moose points, which helps those lower in the point pool. In the future, those will just be given to somebody else and the point creep will keep climbing.

We already know people were using non-hunting family members to abuse the party application process, get ready for more abuse that just exacerbates point creep.

Grizzly
 
>I'm an old guy who has
>lived through the no LE
>units to the current system.
> Here is my memory:
>
>When I was a boy everyone
>went deer hunting, including grandma.
> There were 200,000 Utah
>tag holders on the mountain
>on opening day and for
>the first few hours it
>sounded like a war had
>erupted. That is true
>because World War II had
>ended several years earlier and
>deer had literally not been
>hunted for a decade.
>Hunting was more of a
>camping trip for deer meat
>and numbers were exceptionally high
>and despite the fact that
>the effective range of most
>weapons was 150 yards, lots
>of deer were killed.
>
>Fast forward a couple of decades.
> Deer numbers had plummeted
>and many of the 200,000
>tag holders, became more interested
>in antlers and less interested
>in meat. The average
>success rate had dropped to
>20% or less and most
>deer killed were yearlings or
>does. (yes either sex hunting
>was legal).
>
>Some units got so much pressure
>that low numbers caused the
>DWR to close units for
>5 or 6 years to
>rebuild herds. When those
>units rebounded the DWR could
>see the writing on the
>wall if they opened these
>units to general hunting.
>Everyone would go there and
>the deer would be slaughtered.
> So they implemented a
>Limited Entry hunt that you
>could apply to get a
>tag for. Those initial
>LE units got such favorable
>reviews from the lucky tag
>holders that many hunters called
>for more LE units to
>give more hunters a chance
>at big bucks.
>Other efforts were implemented to improve
>deer quality, such as antler
>restrictions, etc. but those failed
>miserably because too many hunters
>shot first and counted points
>later.
>Elk units and OIL tags have
>always been limited because of
>low animal numbers, but when
>elk herds exploded general season
>hunting was allowed in some
>areas.
>
>There you have it from my
>old feeble mind.
>
>Oh and by the way, I
>like it the way it
>is now rather than in
>the days when I was
>fighting to find a two
>point.

I as well am old and a lifelong Utah resident. I far prefer the old way. Yes there were fewer quality animals and fewer overall, but there have always been a few really good ones. I like to be able to hunt every year. Used to be that you could hunt good animals if you were more ambitious than your competition. If you were willing to wear out some boot leather you could do very well. The 4 wheeler crew, not so much. I harvested some great dear during those years, simply by working harder than others. Now seems like I get to sit home 1 out of 3 years...not an improvement to me.
 
Yeah I would be adamantly opposed to any transferable points. Utah's system that allows youth hunters (<18) to hunt with a parent or grandparent is a great idea as you have to assume that 90% of the time the parent would of drawn the tag anyway.
The big key is the parent or grandparent still has to draw while the youth hunter is <18. The thought that points could be donated to a youth is scary and is a bad idea.
 
I too have seen and miss the good ole days. Not worried about a tag, just looking forward to time spent with family. Didn't much care about once in a lifetime hunts, just wanted to spend time with family and hopefully bring home some meat. The quest for trophies and what some say is a more quality hunt has turned the hunting arena topsy-turvy. I fell for this notion and started applying for an LE unit I hunted as a kid with my family. I was irritated and disillusioned when my young nephew drew twice a LE permit when I had not drawn at all. That seems fair, right?! I finally drew the tag and realized I had been taken. The hunting was much worse than my open area and the buck sightings were much less frequent. Save yourself the heartache and hunt your open area harder/smarter. You know the area well by now. Just an old man's rant.
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-12-16 AT 11:12AM (MST)[p]>Part three... what bugs me, is
>that since I wasn't able
>to put in from the
>beginning, I am behind the
>curve of the point creep.
> I'm not sure of
>a solution to this problem,
>though.


Hahaha this one you don't have to worry about at all! All the states including Utah have no problem disposing of us old timers with 20+ points by throwing us under the bus, changing the rules in the middle of the game with legislation that steals our point value to encourage fresh young blood zero point holder applicant money. It happens somewhere every year. That's what corrupt attorneys, politicians, special interest groups & wildlife boards do. What do they care? They already have 20 years of our time and money. This is a fact not an opinion.

So you should not let your situation bug you at all. You are in fact in great shape when it comes to this.


*****************************************************
Greenhorns educate yourselves. Wherever SFW goes, scandals and corruption follow. Write your legislators:

http://kutv.com/news/local/allegations-of-corruption-surround-utah-hungtin-and-conservation-expo

https://www.cascwild.org/don-peay-the-man-who-would-be-king-baron/

http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs...ares-north-american-hunting-model-“socialism”

http://www.standard.net/Recreation/...16-Western-Hunting-and-Conservation-Expo.html

http://www.mtbullypulpit.org/2012/06/pox-on-fox.html

http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2013...on-essentially-buy-utah-division-of-wildlife/

http://westernvaluesproject.org/tax...hunting-energy-industry-over-hunters-anglers/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/u...-but-hunters-cry-foul.html?smid=pl-share&_r=2

http://www.themudflats.net/archives/25891

http://www.sltrib.com/news/4054427-155/rolly-lawyers-criticism-of-herbert-leads
 
I don't disagree with you Jake, bigger, better-scoring animals for all species abound in Utah, but why, and at what cost..??

Most of the LE elk units are managed not just for big bulls, but really big bulls. The same is true of most LE deer units. Why..?? So that a few public hunters can kill GIANT bucks and bulls..?? No. It's so that exceptional tags can be sold and auctioned off to benefit private interests. The DWR manages those herds in a manner that benefits dozens of private interest groups, and as a bone thrown to the rest of us, they also allot public tags as well...

I've decided that the LE system is meant to reduce public opportunity, not increase it. Yet, those with deep pockets are given the increased opportunity at trophy animals every year, on our public land, taking our public resource, which has been protected and babied by the DWR in order to grow the largest set of antlers possible.

I realize you probably do see several 300+ bulls taken from general season units every year... But out of tens of thousands of elk hunters, "several" is only a percent of a percent of the total number of tags... Those are very poor statistics.

I burned my 12 points this year on LE Deer. I doubt I will get back into the LE tag game here in Utah anymore. What is more likely is that I will seek out new general season opportunities... And if I am really lucky, maybe even out-of-state. But that may take more money than I'm willing to spend.

"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 

Similar threads

Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
6k
Vanilla
Vanilla

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

45.jpg
78894B9B-2AF3-43F2-84A5-13E499EB85F6.jpeg
91F5C527-2EA9-4A68-9E27-5481C9CD0B3F.jpeg
IMG_2733.jpeg
20171204_163621.jpg
66882590352__EB133E0B-131C-4C88-9B11-01D939C5413C.jpeg
IMG_3580.JPG
Big Velvet Muley
10984638_940046956089901_7821618751439973885_n.jpg
IMG_79781(1).jpg
71E970EA-7180-47A1-8F30-E1D0756A8A5F.jpeg
1115161011c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom