Point creep

[Bowbuster]

Hey guys just thinking about point creep and the question arises. What if Utah made a change to the draw system for just limited entry and OIL tags that starting 2019 they gave all tags to the max point holders and cut out the random draw. Then from there forward alternate back and forth every odd year all tags went to max points and even years split 50/50 like they do it currently.

I think it would help the guys that are a couple points off the max, it would eventually catch up to them and get them through the system a little quicker. It may also keep people from even putting in for the tag on the years that max gets all the tags, they'll just apply for a point if they don't have a lot of points. Maybe? I don't know.

I know this issue has been beat to death but whats you're guys thoughts?

 

[Zeke]

Here's a couple thoughts:

First, the random keeps folks playing the game and the F&G like that a lot so you'll NEVER get it changed.

Second, any change will benefit some guys and hurt some guys (the term "guys" isn't gender specific). It sounds good to those who are "almost there" on points but eliminates the chance for those who are way out of the running.

Zeke

#livelikezac

 

[hornkiller]

I bet you have alot of points built up? Anyway that's a stupid idea just sayin!

 

[Bowbuster]

>I bet you have alot of
>points built up? Anyway that's
>a stupid idea just sayin!
>

No actually I don't have many points. Most points is for sheep and that's only at 11 which is the middle of the pack.

I think it's the best of both worlds we would still have random tags and we'd move more applicants with more points through the system. Win win for everybody, compromise and nobody is left out.

It would be interesting to see if say in a 10 year time frame if it would bring the bonus pool down a few points on the low end and applicants would be in the bonus pool a few years quicker.

 

[nripepi]

It is the same as changing it from 50/50 to 75/25 like Wyoming. Plusses and minuses. You would definitely move more higher point holders through quicker, but I think Utah wants to give those with low points a better chance. I know a lot of people that have drawn in the 50% random. I say leave it alone.

 

[Packout]

If you want to stop point creep then simply CAP the number of points.

If it was capped at say 30, then people would have 6+ years to figure if they want to keep applying for the hardest to draw tags or come up with a different plan. And 30 points means 30 years of applications-- half of a person's adult life. Any permit that takes longer probably shouldn't be given on long term preference. We have many hunts which take hundreds of years to work thru the applicants. A cap would also allow others coming later to catch up to the top level.

If they don't cap points then someday there will be someone with 70 points.....

 

[OchocoKid]

What's wrong with someone having 70 points? other than they didn't draw out. why should someone who's tried for 30 years be able to wash his extra 40 down the drain.

There should be an advantage to those who pay their dues and their money in pursuit to the tag they want. Colorado has the best system, WY and OR are the next best.










Stay Thirsty My Friends

 

[Squaw]

Only way I see it stopping is to offer more tags. You cant have 1000+ applicants and only offer 50+- tags.

If no others jump into the points game, it will take YEARS to clear out the currant applicants

 

[Bowbuster]

I respect all you input guys, all very true.

That's exactly my argument is it would put more emphasis on the applicant that is "almost there" and clear out a little bit of the log jam and then in return drop the bonus pool by a couple points maybe? Who wouldn't want to be included in the bonus pool with a couple less points than it does currently? I know I would.

Then on the even years the random applicant still has the chance of drawing a tag of a lifetime. win-win

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

I say leave it alone. I wouldn't mind if they went completely random but that would piss too many people off. I actually think Utah is pretty dang good, I like the half and half.

 

[grizzly]

>If you want to stop point
>creep then simply CAP the
>number of points.
>
>If it was capped at say
>30,

With so many more applicants than tags, eventually every single tag would reach the 30 point cap and the points would be even more diluted and useless.

Time to go pure random like Idaho and New Mexico. Giving preference and advantage to an age class of hunters that arbitrarily was of hunting age during the formative years of the point system is beyond reason.

Grizzly

 

[elkantlers]

How about we put all the expo tags and banquet tags back into the draw. That would help a bunch. Just sayin'.

 

[arns]

Elkantler you're 100% right that is a CHIT load of tags that could go to help the creep.Another thing that would help is over half the OIL and LE units have odd number of tags.If there is 5 tags 3 should go to high point holders and 2 tags to the general.I have tried to change this for years.Most guys say it's only 1 tag but that's a CHIT load of tags over the last 20 years.One other thing that would help the Elk creep is every unit should have 2 premium tags.Most units have 1 tag and the DWR sells one.Just remember the General fund needs that money.The sad part is my 10 year old grandson will probably never draw a OIL tag.Unless is lucky or has a Chit load of money.

 

[JakeH]

Personally I think they should put a cap on points starting now, and no longer give any more points.
Everyone is stuck at there current point structure. Then for the next 5 years keep the 50/50 split, this will allow people time to burn there points on an easier draw unit if they want to, after 5 years all tags are random, but everyone that still has points keeps their points and will have that many chances in the hat.
So if you have 5 points your name is in the draw 5 times.
This will eventually weed all the points out of the system, it may take 20 years but it will eventually zero everyone out.



Jake H. BIG BONE HUNTING Page on Facebook.

 

[elkfromabove]

Keep adding points and giving random draw numbers for each point/application, but drop the 50/50 and go to a random draw with all the tags. And allow residents to apply for all species like the non-residents. And put a cap on the Conservation tags like they have with EXPO tags.

 

[grizzly]

EFA, I couldn't disagree more with letting residents put in for all species. We already have more applicants than tags, and we're self-limiting to the one species people desire most.

Having all applicants after every species will only make that worse. The only reason they let NR do it is because they were trying to entice them into buying licenses and applying.

Grizzly

 

[grizzly]

JakeH, that's one of the better ideas I've heard.

Grizzly

 

[Bowbuster]

Unless people jump ship from the top deer and elk units it could take 100 years to zero out everybody's points. When there's only 8 tags given and 1000 applicants.

 

[WapitiBob]

Maybe take a few minutes to understand how the draw works before you start applying.

 

[BeDawg]

Leave it as it is. Change will do nothing. This is a limited resource with an unlimited amount of applicants that rises each year. Understand how the draw works and draw your tags. Let those who want to chase dream tags continue chasing them.

 

[grizzly]

^^^^^^^^

>Leave it as it is. Change
>will do nothing.

[youtube]giphy.com/gifs/l3V0o7QyRb08irLag/html5[/youtube]

 

[ByeByeObamas]

I hope the gender specific comment earlier was a joke...

I think the key will be to continue to increase options to put in for. It will spread things out. Some guys will have to accept that (just having a chance) is as good as it gets.

There are hunts that i have to except that i will never get, even if i wait 30 yrs. Case in point is oregon elk. I have 11 pts and know that i will never get a wenaha tag. Even at 60...25 yrs from now. (There is a small chance with the new premium draw).

Btw...oregon has horrible dates, max of 5% to non res and is expensive. Someone said it was a good system. A guy i know drew a great bull tag with 3 pts in utah. That alone got me doing this state 10 yrs ago. Just saying.

 

[OchocoKid]

Oregon does have a good system, the same as Wyoming. being a resident I was talking from a resident's perspective about the point system, not the NR quota.

you are correct about the NR quota though that is different than WY and as I've said 100 times it's unfair . as a resident I apologize for my state screwing you over, unfortunately for you residents pay the bulk of the bill and we don't need the NR hunter to fund our game dept, therefore getting more NR tags is a hard sell. but that's no excuse for being selfish , again I apologize.



Be that as it may the point system itself still works the same , and it rewards the 75% who have been in the game the longest. in the age where everyone is a winner and expects instant gratification I still think those who have paid their dues and their money deserve to be rewarded . leave the point systems alone.













Stay Thirsty My Friends

 

[2lumpy]

Tog, I agree with your thought process one hundred percent. Very insightful and very fair. That's why your political statements are so baffling for me.



DC

 

[Elkslayer2015]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-04-17 AT 02:43PM (MST)[p]What I think they need to do is focus on the success rate and add 5% to 10% more tags to the units that are under 80% success rate and add 10% to 15% more to the hunts under 50% success rate this will help the points creep When they get there harvest report done they can manage this very well on a year to year bases just a thought

 

[gznokes]

this discussion would be more interesting if a stats expert would run some models.

 

[goofyelk]

Another vote for 'leave it alone '.

Its a good system for issuing permits to a limited resource.

 

[elkfromabove]

>this discussion would be more interesting
>if a stats expert would
>run some models.
>
>

The funniest post on the thread! Everybody on here is a stats expert and can tell you exactly what will happen if you do or don't do it his/her way!

 

[Downrange]

I think we should go to 70/30 split instead of 50/50 and every unit should have an even number of permits. I think its crazy how if there is 9 tags for a unit that 4 go to the top pt holders and 5 go to the rest. Good hell make it even or give the other tag to the guy that has the most pts. I have never understood that one. I also think our draw should be just like nevada's they have the best draw system in the western united states and i think utah should adopt it.

 

[Deerlove]

Only way push more hunters through and lower the pt creep is to change dates and more primitive weapon hunts. It's not rocket science.

 

[txhunter58]

that would only help in units that don't have max point tags currently. Currently for those units with max point tags, you give 1/2 the tags to max point holders every year. And you want to give all the tags every other year. Do that math and the number of tags the max point holders gets comes out the same in the long run.

In those units that only have 1 tag (so no max point tags), it would make a difference, but not that much.

You didn't say whether you are a res or non-res. As a non res I can tell you something that would absolutely help with point creep for us: go back to only being able to apply for one species. When they opened it up to all species for us, our chances of drawing went to crap!

AND, we are actually only applying for one tag! Yes, we can apply for more than one on paper, but once we get drawn for a single tag, we are out of the running for all other tags. They will only give us one even if we were lucky enough to draw 3!

Simple solution for that is to go back to only allowing for all to apply for one hunt, but still let us apply for points in all species. Therefore, they still get their money, and much of our point creep goes away overnight. I have 12 for deer and 13 for elk and am still nowhere close to drawing a decent LE tag that I want..

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[Vanilla]

We're talking about reducing point creep, and someone thinks that letting residents apply for all species will do that?

Am I eating crazy pills?

We hammer this out about 6 times per year, and while there are some really interesting ideas out there, the one above about capping points and giving 5 years to determine if you want to use them before the draw goes random (with points still intact) is one of those, I still favor leaving as is. There simply is no perfect way to do it, but Utah's way is pretty good.

 

[ridgetops]

Getting rid of the current mentor program would help.

Get ready for change because it's going to happen!

 

[Homer]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-08-17 AT 10:36PM (MST)[p]I would gladly forget all the point money I have spent if they would go back to pure lottery......


.....I feel so sorry for the young guys just getting started....and being so far behind.

Idaho is right....

 

[gundog2]

Don?t let people apply for general hunt AND limited entry hunts in same year.

 

[cannonball]

That makes to much sense. The Utah BGB would never approve that, but it certainly would decrease the point creep. You could even expand it and allow those who wanted to hunt on the regular hunt to put in for a point on the limited entry. It would still improve the limited entry draw odds drastically.

 

[ByeByeObamas]

Not sure if it was mentioned, but add more primitive late hunts that would pull guys off the select few.

They started with the muzzy deer nov hunts. Those types of hunts will spread a few guys out. I am tempted to do it!

Im one of those guys that just wants a fun, high success hunt, not too worried about 170+. Id gladly burn my 10 pts on a fun hunt. My standard of fun is pretty low. Until there is something like that, my group of 4 is just plugging up the bucket with everyone else on the 3 or 4 great areas. I really dont care if i get those specific tags.

General unit muzzy tags after the regular season seems good and would get my points. I just dont think there will be enough tags for our group to go.

Hope that made sense

 

[bbrown]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-09-17 AT 12:15PM (MST)[p]If they get rid of the spike hunts in LE elk areas they could raise the amount of permit numbers on big bulls. Also move the rifle hunt back to oct. out of the peak of the rut.

 

[bbrown]

For deer, I like the idea of making all units Limited Entry state wide like colorado. Also make private land vouchers only good for private land they were issued to.

 

[gundog2]

They can't really make all deer hunts LE because they have promised lifetime hunters one deer tag every year and they already have separate bonus and preference point systems for deer.

I think they could move the general hunts to be earlier in the year and then expand opportunities for late season muzzy and rifle hunts on all units. Only let deer applicants apply for one general OR one LE hunt per year. You can accumulate bonus and preference points, but you can only earn one bonus point OR one preference point in any given year. You lose all bonus and preference points if you fail to apply for deer for two consecutive years.

 

[elkfromabove]

>We're talking about reducing point creep,
>and someone thinks that letting
>residents apply for all species
>will do that?
>
>Am I eating crazy pills?
>
>We hammer this out about 6
>times per year, and while
>there are some really interesting
>ideas out there, the one
>above about capping points and
>giving 5 years to determine
>if you want to use
>them before the draw goes
>random (with points still intact)
>is one of those, I
>still favor leaving as is.
>There simply is no perfect
>way to do it, but
>Utah's way is pretty good.
>

Then EVERY state west of the Mississippi (and probably those on the east as well) must be eating crazy pills 'cause, with only a couple of exceptions regarding the various species of bighorn sheep, Utah is the ONLY western state that restricts residents to only one of LE or OIAL permits in the public draw per year.
All the others allow residents to purchase and/or apply for and draw all available big game species. And we're the only one that seems to have a serious problem with point creep. We've been programed to think in terms of having to choose the ONE species that interests us most and forgetting about the others, but there is little difference, if any, in the overall odds of drawing SOME LE or OIAL tag if we were allowed to apply for and draw ALL the species. Any individual species may have worse odds, but by applying for ALL species you would then have 8 times as many chances to draw as you now do with one.

We constantly hear on this forum how great the draw systems are in other states compared to Utah. Dah!

 

[Elkhunter96]

The Colorado deer systems works pretty good, for them. I don't think it would work out as well in UT. The Colorado elk system is a mess and has point creep galore. With 2,10 and 201 being the top units, young people starting out will never draw those tags. Even unit 61 has blown up with point creep.

Having lived in both states, I will say the UT system is better than CO. Could it be better, yes. But with the tag numbers the way they are with keeping up with the trophy quality, it simply isn't going to change. The best recommendation was to put the expo tags back into the regular draw. just my opinion.

 

[HiDesertHunter5]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-18 AT 12:39PM (MST)[p]Maybe a hybrid of Nevada and Utah. Still have half to the max point holders but for the other half that everyone is in for do it like Nevada. Square the points and give the people playing the game a longer time a better chance while still giving the person with low points a shot as well. That could help get some more higher point holders tags. Of course it wont solve it but maybe help a little.