Points are Points

[Vanilla]

Why would anyone new start putting in when they look at the odds. I think if odds went up for hunts, they might attract some younger hunters. If I were 25, why would I start?

You can’t draw a tag if you don’t apply. It’s unfortunate we’ve found ourselves in a situation where the demand so greatly outnumbers the supply, but people still draw every year. Every year someone with very few and even zero points draw great tags we’d all love to have. (Well, most of us, anyway. Those of us that enjoy hunting and not just bi$&?ing about hunting.)

Can’t play if you don’t apply.

 

[txhunter58]

So you’re saying there’s a chance!!

I’d rather have a 10% chance of drawing one tag than 2% of drawing any tag

And not only would it help your random chances, but would help draw a bonus tag sooner.

You are a NR?

 

[elkassassin]

Maybe With that Happening The OPPORTUNISTS Can BAWL For Some More Tags Issued!

That'll Damn Sure F'N Fix Everything!

You can’t draw a tag if you don’t apply. It’s unfortunate we’ve found ourselves in a situation where the demand so greatly outnumbers the supply, but people still draw every year. Every year someone with very few and even zero points draw great tags we’d all love to have. (Well, most of us, anyway. Those of us that enjoy hunting and not just bi$&?ing about hunting.)

Can’t play if you don’t apply.

 

[LivingTheDream]

But they could have their cake and eat it too. Allow us to apply for points for all species, but just put in for one hunt. They make the same money and our odds go up astronomically

Why would anyone new start putting in when they look at the odds. I think if odds went up for hunts, they might attract some younger hunters. If I were 25, why would I start?

And of course, no one can ever draw more than one tag even if your number gets pulled more than once. 1 tag limit

I have seen you post this up before and I agree with you 100% on this. It would drastically improve draw odds for NR. No way a NR is drawing preference for a lot of these tags anyway. By allowing NR to keep buying points it is keeps revenue up.

I actually think this is going to be necessary for all NR across Western states. Just got to focus on what you want to hunt that year. It sucks but as it was said earlier people have to choose what they really want to hunt.

 

[Elkslayer2015]

This is anecdotal. If you take the same approach on a more desirable unit/hunt (more applications) that gives less tags you’ll see that it stretches the draw out decades for current low point guys. There is no doubt giving all tags to the high point holders slows creep, but it has a cost. The cost of eliminating even the slightest chance of drawing for anyone shy of max. Then someone who truly is an opportunist has had that option removed from them. What Gundog said is correct. It only appears to be positive on lower end hunts. It is especially accentuated by the small number of guys that got sick of waiting for another tag and jumped into the draw above the crowd at the superficial max. Run it in the beaver early, Henries rifle deer, San Juan early rifle elk or better yet, the Pauns multi season deer and let us know how it looks. Going pure preference would give the low point guys their first real chance around year 2300 or so.

Simpleton/Gundog yes you are correct. I just pick the first one that I stop on it happen to be fish lake but there is a lot more that this does work on.

People have tried getting the early rifle Elk hunt moved out of September. Every time it gets brought up what about the hunters that have been applying for decades its not fair for them.
If we are going to use the excuse that it is not fair? Which I have heard this a million times on here and other forums.
Well to be fair then all hunts need to got to top point holder period.

Also the hunts You did pick the hunts do have low tag quota and higher demand.
The hunts like the early rifle hunt big demand or the multi season there is only small amount of tags issued. Can it still stay at the 50/50 split probably.
The early LE rifle elk hunt is horrible odds now. With minimal tags given and the Multi season on any hunt they have horrible odds, What hunters don't realize that there is a good possibility they wont ever draw one of these in their lifetime.

Is the 50/50 split fair for higher point holders? Absolutely not and you both know it, but we sure like hopes and dreams on getting lucky.

I have done a lot of research on this. There is actually 24 plus LE Elk hunts getting rid of the 50/50 split and going top point holder between Archery/Mid/late season Elk hunts. We can knock years off the draw, just like I showed in my other post.
Why not get hunters pushed threw the system quicker. We need to quit adding years that it takes to the draw by doing this might just lower the pressure just a little on the higher demand hunts.

The GS deer draw is fair, Those tags all go to top point holders.

If you don't see the big picture here, add the 50/50 split to some of the high demand GS deer units and look how long it will take to draw those tags.

 

[Mallardsx2]

It's getting to the point that maybe Utah should be OIL for LE elk and OIL LE Deer for NR.

I would be ok with that.

 

[Vanilla]

It's getting to the point that maybe Utah should be OIL for LE elk and OIL LE Deer for NR.

I would be ok with that.

No thank you!!!

 

[Simpleton]

Simpleton/Gundog yes you are correct. I just pick the first one that I stop on it happen to be fish lake but there is a lot more that this does work on.

People have tried getting the early rifle Elk hunt moved out of September. Every time it gets brought up what about the hunters that have been applying for decades its not fair for them.
If we are going to use the excuse that it is not fair? Which I have heard this a million times on here and other forums.
Well to be fair then all hunts need to got to top point holder period.

Also the hunts You did pick the hunts do have low tag quota and higher demand.
The hunts like the early rifle hunt big demand or the multi season there is only small amount of tags issued. Can it still stay at the 50/50 split probably.
The early LE rifle elk hunt is horrible odds now. With minimal tags given and the Multi season on any hunt they have horrible odds, What hunters don't realize that there is a good possibility they wont ever draw one of these in their lifetime.

Is the 50/50 split fair for higher point holders? Absolutely not and you both know it, but we sure like hopes and dreams on getting lucky.

I have done a lot of research on this. There is actually 24 plus LE Elk hunts getting rid of the 50/50 split and going top point holder between Archery/Mid/late season Elk hunts. We can knock years off the draw, just like I showed in my other post.
Why not get hunters pushed threw the system quicker. We need to quit adding years that it takes to the draw by doing this might just lower the pressure just a little on the higher demand hunts.

The GS deer draw is fair, Those tags all go to top point holders.

If you don't see the big picture here, add the 50/50 split to some of the high demand GS deer units and look how long it will take to draw those tags.

I don't think it has anything to do with "fair" and you will never find a solution that everyone considers "fair". The fact that everyone is in the same system is as "fair" as it will ever get. You are entitled to your opinion, but the issue I see is that your fix only works for some hunts (as you also admitted) and where it does work, it would only be temporary. Run your numbers for a decade or two while including the growth rate to the incoming applicants with zero points, you will start to see the number of points required to draw climb at an increasing rate in addition to the fact that there will be ZERO chance for anyone not in the top point pools to draw.

For example, let's look at all RES LE Elk apps in 2023 so we aren't cherry picking a specific hunt, there were 5,749 apps with 2 points, 6,360 apps with 1 point in the resident pool and 8,044 apps with 0 points. That increase each year is what will be the demise of your plan. Even if it did hold steady, there are only 3,057 LE Elk tags awarded to residents in the draw each year. Once the masses of people with low points run into the preference pool in your suggestion, the points required will increase every single year without ever retreating. This also holds true you look at the Fish Lake Mid (from your example) - 2 points - 64, 1 point - 83, 0 points - 93. The increase is over 10% annually. Maybe they will be able to increase tags consistently at the same rate of applicant growth, but I won't hold my breath.

The only way to reduce pressure on high demand hunts is remove the option to put in for them while simultaneously putting in for general and/or dedicated hunter. Under the current system a single individual could gain up to 3 separate points for the same species and not get a tag, or gain up to 2 points and get a tag. This is where the accumulation of points (specifically on deer) balloons. This is more difficult on the elk side, but doable. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible on antelope or OIL due to their limited availability and the lack of a "general season" permit. That is a just the boat we find ourselves in.

Don't get me wrong, I like that I can apply for a great deer tag, a dedicated hunter tag, and still hunt a general unit for deer, but in my opinion, it isn't sustainable. So I would be willing to give up multiple options in favor of one. We are just seeing the very beginnings of an issue that will be much worse for hunters in Utah in 20-30 years. Allow hunters to choose what is important to them, opportunity or perceived quality, before the decision is taken away from them by the system.

 

[Betterluckythangood]

It wouldn’t be the end of the world if Utah and other states raised the minimum age to fourteen.

 

[gundog2]

Simpleton/Gundog yes you are correct. I just pick the first one that I stop on it happen to be fish lake but there is a lot more that this does work on.

People have tried getting the early rifle Elk hunt moved out of September. Every time it gets brought up what about the hunters that have been applying for decades its not fair for them.
If we are going to use the excuse that it is not fair? Which I have heard this a million times on here and other forums.
Well to be fair then all hunts need to got to top point holder period.

Also the hunts You did pick the hunts do have low tag quota and higher demand.
The hunts like the early rifle hunt big demand or the multi season there is only small amount of tags issued. Can it still stay at the 50/50 split probably.
The early LE rifle elk hunt is horrible odds now. With minimal tags given and the Multi season on any hunt they have horrible odds, What hunters don't realize that there is a good possibility they wont ever draw one of these in their lifetime.

Is the 50/50 split fair for higher point holders? Absolutely not and you both know it, but we sure like hopes and dreams on getting lucky.

I have done a lot of research on this. There is actually 24 plus LE Elk hunts getting rid of the 50/50 split and going top point holder between Archery/Mid/late season Elk hunts. We can knock years off the draw, just like I showed in my other post.
Why not get hunters pushed threw the system quicker. We need to quit adding years that it takes to the draw by doing this might just lower the pressure just a little on the higher demand hunts.

The GS deer draw is fair, Those tags all go to top point holders.

If you don't see the big picture here, add the 50/50 split to some of the high demand GS deer units and look how long it will take to draw those tags.

Well, I drew my early rifle elk hunt last year with 24 points and my desert bighorn sheep this year with 25 points. The system worked okay for me. It would have been nice to draw these tags 10 years and 40 lbs ago, but that’s okay. If I could have gave up my chances to draw tags 20 years ago so that I might draw a few years earlier, I would have chose the chance to draw a tag every year. I respect your ideas, but I think Simpleton nailed it when he said “fair” is when everyone plays by the same rules. Many people would argue that the most fair way to allocate tags is totally random (like Idaho). Utah crossed that bridge 30 years ago. It’s a little late to pull the rug now. You can believe what you want to believe, but I don’t believe that giving all tags to the top point holders will reduce point creep. Point creep is caused by having more people come into the system than people getting cleared out from the system. It doesn’t matter whether you tag x-number of tags from the top, bottom, middle, or whatever. You will have point creep if more people are coming into the system, each year, than people being clear out from the system. You are not the only person who has done research on this and you are not the only person who can see the “big picture”. I am not a fool. There is not a perfect way to allocate permits when the demand exceeds the resource. I have applied for hunts and hunted in at least nine different states. Each state has a different way of doing things and there are merits to each system. I would argue that the Utah system is just as good as any other system. It is what it is.

 

[txhunter58]

It's getting to the point that maybe Utah should be OIL for LE elk and OIL LE Deer for NR.

I would be ok with that.

For 98% of us it is a OIL tag. Drew my LE elk after 20+ years and now have 6 years before I can apply again. I will be 72 then. So I am ok with just making it a OIL for NR. That said, it doesn’t improve odds any appreciable amount to do that.

 

[Elkslayer2015]

Run your numbers for a decade or two while including the growth rate to the incoming applicants with zero points, you will start to see the number of points required to draw climb at an increasing rate in addition to the fact that there will be ZERO chance for anyone not in the top point pools to draw.

Already did! I went back 10 years and by doing so it also accounted for new growth for 10 years. look I'm telling everyone 50/50 is not the way to go.

Now if they took away the 5 year waiting period then we would have a big mess on our hands that's for sure.

If you don't believe me try it.

There is a reason why GS is still somewhat low after all these years and it's because they don't have the 50/50 split.

 

[chrisamx]

All these Points Systems making Ponzi proud!

 

[Simpleton]

If you don't believe me try it.

I don't believe you. It is simple math that Gundog pointed out. When the tags coming out of the pool are less than the new applicants coming in points creep happens. The only thing going totally preference based does is eliminate the chance for anyone outside of the max pool. Run your math for the Fish Lake Mid (the hunt you first cherry picked) from the most current data (2023) keeping the number of tags awarded the same and increase the new applicant pool by 10% each year.

Here I did it for you... I ran the model for 20 years. PDF attached.
Cliff notes: Yellow highlights the points needed to be guaranteed a tag. (some are highlighted with 0 tags allotted because the max pool has too many applicants for anyone to be guaranteed) Going preference only will reduce point creep from 9 points being needed to 6 after a few years. It stays at 6 for a couple of years and then starts going up. In 20 years, the same tag would require 12 points. If you continued the trajectory, it would increase at such a rate that it would take an applicant that starts applying 20 years from now 55 years to be guaranteed. And this is modeling a permit that is considered to be average at best. The more desirable hunts would have results that are extremely worse.

After being shown this, if you still think this is the best way forward there are really only two explanations... 1. You don't understand. 2. You don't care, because it suits you.

 

[Simpleton]

There is a reason why GS is still somewhat low after all these years and it's because they don't have the 50/50 split.

General Season is still somewhat low because of the volume of tags vs number of applicants, period.

 

[elkassassin]

I Said It Wouldn't Work Before The Plan That Was Drempt Up Was Put In Place!

Most Youth Will Say F'This I Ain't Doing It!

Now Some Of Their Parents Will Put Them In & It Won't Be Long & They Might Get A Tag Around Age 60-65!

What a F-U-B-A-R FIASCO!

 

[Dangbig]

It wouldn’t be the end of the world if Utah and other states raised the minimum age to fourteen.

I had to wait till 16….

 

[Elkslayer2015]

I don't believe you. It is simple math that Gundog pointed out. When the tags coming out of the pool are less than the new applicants coming in points creep happens. The only thing going totally preference based does is eliminate the chance for anyone outside of the max pool. Run your math for the Fish Lake Mid (the hunt you first cherry picked) from the most current data (2023) keeping the number of tags awarded the same and increase the new applicant pool by 10% each year.

Here I did it for you... I ran the model for 20 years. PDF attached.
Cliff notes: Yellow highlights the points needed to be guaranteed a tag. (some are highlighted with 0 tags allotted because the max pool has too many applicants for anyone to be guaranteed) Going preference only will reduce point creep from 9 points being needed to 6 after a few years. It stays at 6 for a couple of years and then starts going up. In 20 years, the same tag would require 12 points. If you continued the trajectory, it would increase at such a rate that it would take an applicant that starts applying 20 years from now 55 years to be guaranteed. And this is modeling a permit that is considered to be average at best. The more desirable hunts would have results that are extremely worse.

After being shown this, if you still think this is the best way forward there are really only two explanations... 1. You don't understand. 2. You don't care, because it suits you.

Okay just so were clear. You can say what you want math is very easy for me.
What I posted and what you posted looks a hell of a lot better because it gives you a lot better idea on when your going to draw.
I get it, yes it will start to climb after 20 years but the 50/50 split will be a lot higher in 20 years.

We want to keep years down not add years. Which your demonstration shows.

The 50/50 split adds more years to your chances on getting a tag at max point.

Now show all of us, add 50/50 split to your demonstration, and see how high and fast it will climb to draw guarantee tag at max points in 20 years.

No you didn't do it for me I already did it. I even went back 10 years as well and took out the 50/50 split.

General Season is still somewhat low because of the volume of tags vs number of applicants, period.

I get that. But if you add a 50/50 split to it changes the years to draw dramatically over the course of ten years. Yes some units it won't but high demand units it will.

Do south slope Bonanza/vernal for instance look how fast it will climb over 10 years.

By the way I only have 3 LE points.

There is a reason why other states don't do this.

 

[gundog2]

There is a reason why other states don't do this.

Colorado uses a strict preference point system for deer and elk. They have serious problems with point creep, but the system works for them because they have enough deer and elk hunt opportunities that people can pick units that are easy to draw or they can wait a lifetime for the “best” units. I would not be opposed to a strict preference point system if we had all of the deer tags in one pool and all of the elk tags (including antlerless) in another pool. I believe that was the original subject of this thread.

There were 54,199 applicants for 3,057 LE elk permits this year. There were 8,044 applicants with 0 points and 6360 applicants with 1 point. This does not even include applicants that opted out for bonus point only. There are clearly far more people coming into the system than people getting cleared out. You are proposing to completely disenfranchise over 50,000 people (2023 numbers), and even more people in the future. The fact is, the top point holder are there by their own choice. There are many units where people can draw bonus permits with six or more points. There was one bonus permit given out to a person with only one point.

Again, you are not the only person that is easy with math or the only person that can “see the big picture”. I analyze data for a living using high-performance computers. You don’t need to talk down on us. Check yourself.

 

[Betterluckythangood]

Just for fun, can someone do the math and tell us all how much point creep would be reduced if the minimum age was fourteen?

I know it is unthinkable!!!

My guess is five to ten years.

Twelve and thirteen year olds can stay entertained in the fall by hunting waterfowl, upland game, fishing, tagging along with Dad or Uncle Jerry on their hunts or a multitude of other activities.

 

[Elkslayer2015]

Colorado uses a strict preference point system for deer and elk. They have serious problems with point creep, but the system works for them because they have enough deer and elk hunt opportunities that people can pick units that are easy to draw or they can wait a lifetime for the “best” units. I would not be opposed to a strict preference point system if we had all of the deer tags in one pool and all of the elk tags (including antlerless) in another pool. I believe that was the original subject of this thread.

There were 54,199 applicants for 3,057 LE elk permits this year. There were 8,044 applicants with 0 points and 6360 applicants with 1 point. This does not even include applicants that opted out for bonus point only. There are clearly far more people coming into the system than people getting cleared out. You are proposing to completely disenfranchise over 50,000 people (2023 numbers), and even more people in the future. The fact is, the top point holder are there by their own choice. There are many units where people can draw bonus permits with six or more points. There was one bonus permit given out to a person with only one point.

Again, you are not the only person that is easy with math or the only person that can “see the big picture”. I analyze data for a living using high-performance computers. You don’t need to talk down on us. Check yourself.

Look I'm not trying to start anything here, I'm just trying to explain the best I know how. by all means I don't mean to talk down on anyone but apparently I have and I apologize.

Doing the 50/50 split with Simpleton demo, It's around 56% to 67% higher on max points over the course of 20 years. because we are not taken enough off the top.

80/20 split would definitely be a lot better for sure.

 

[Vanilla]

I will maintain that in a universe of a bunch of bad systems, Utah’s 50/50 bonus point system they use for LE and OIL is the best of the bad systems.

It doesn’t solve point creep, but nothing will until you have more tags than applicants. Good luck with that ever happening in Utah.

I don’t love the system. I don’t think it’s great, or even all that good. It’s just the best of a bunch of bad systems, in my opinion.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

Look I'm not trying to start anything here, I'm just trying to explain the best I know how. by all means I don't mean to talk down on anyone but apparently I have and I apologize.

Doing the 50/50 split with Simpleton demo, It's around 56% to 67% higher on max points over the course of 20 years. because we are not taken enough off the top.

80/20 split would definitely be a lot better for sure.

My brother is a math junky I sent him over simpleton demonstration.

But the 50-50 split it could easily be around 46% to 70 % higher than what simpleton posted over 20 years. He said top point holder is a better fit for lowering years. Yes it starts stacking up but not as fast as the split does.

He also said If your not taken more applicants off the top then it just keeps adding more and more years a lot quicker to the draw.

He looked at the over all LE elk applications and he said there is way too many tags that are being drawn with lower points.

The only way to slow down the years it take to draw a tag.
by making It top point only draw or 60/40 or 70/30 or 80/20 but definitely not a 50-50.

That’s what he said anyways.

 

[Andouiller]

Combine them, once you draw a tag you no longer gain a point. Eventually this makes all tags a random draw, everyone has terrible odds, but at least they all have the same terrible odds.

 

[Elkrunning-Scared]

Combine them, once you draw a tag you no longer gain a point. Eventually this makes all tags a random draw, everyone has terrible odds, but at least they all have the same terrible odds.

Right!

 

[Simpleton]

My brother is a math junky I sent him over simpleton demonstration.

But the 50-50 split it could easily be anywhere around be around 46% to 70 % higher than what simpleton posted over 20 years. He said top point holder is a better fit for lowering years. Yes it starts stacking up but not as fast as the split does.

If your not taken more applicants off the top then it just keeps adding more and more years a lot quicker to the draw.

He looked at the over all LE elk applicants and he said there is way too many tags that are being drawn with lower points.

The only way to slow down the years it take to draw a tag, is by making It top point only draw or 60/40 or 70/30 or 80/20 but definitely not a 50-50.

That’s what he said anyways.

Without providing some chance to draw a tag with each application many will lose interest. Enough loss of interest will result in the demise of hunting as we know it. It is a bigger issue than just point creep. Completely random would be better for the future of hunting in Utah than changing to completely preference.

 

[Packout]

The easiest way to stop point creep is to cap points so eventually everyone can get to the same level.

Preference points only work when you can draw in a short period of time (5-8 years). Going the 50-50 route on easier to draw tags just increases the wait to draw.
50 tags, 200 applicants. A preference point system removes the top point holders in 4 years. A 50-50 system probably takes that number from 4 years to 6-7 years (depending how many top point holders draw random tags). And the 50-50 system with no waiting period means some people could draw every year and others will wait 6-7 years, which increases if more new applicants come into the system each year.

For high demand tags that take a lifetime or two to draw, the 50-50 and preference point systems are not good systems. 50%-100% of the tags saved for a handful of people who were eligible and able to apply when the system was created. Taking out the hunts with only one tag, Utah gives more than 50% of overall permits to the highest point holders.

Best may be to use a mix- preference points for units with high numbers of permits that can be worked thru within 6-8 years. For units with higher demand and low tags- an additional point for each year applied (not squared) and waiting periods, probably between 5-10 years to Once In a Lifetime.
Deer points should be combined to one system and OIL points should be an OIL point and not species specific.

Of course all that is easier said than done...

 

[LIK2HNT]

Without providing some chance to draw a tag with each application many will lose interest. Enough loss of interest will result in the demise of hunting as we know it. It is a bigger issue than just point creep. Completely random would be better for the future of hunting in Utah than changing to completely preference.

Sorry, but I feel true random is not the way to go. At least with a bonus point system you give those that do not draw a little better chance the next year. Then there is whether to keep points straight, square, or cube.
OR, true random and every tag is treated as OIL. Draw a deer tag and you are out of the draw for life. Non drawn tags can be entered into a second draw that everyone in allowed to apply.