Public comment period for SF0085

S

strang

Guest
Next up pending the passing of this bill is the Wyoming Game and Fish comment period where they establish the regulation of the res. pref points. Perhaps this is an opportunity for this forum to shape how these preference points are administrated.
Should they be averaged as non res points are?
Should a non res with 7 pts move here and his points transfer moving him to the top of the heap?
Should a applicant have to choose between p/p and random draw? Should p/p pt applicants drop to the random draw if unsucessful and get a second shot at their first choice?
Should all three choices be considered before a license is suspended or just first choice
What steps should be taken to insure against manipulation of the p/p system?
Maybe this forum can generate a plan to administrate the optimum way to manage this new wrinkle in the res lic draw proceedure.
And maybe this can be done constructively without name calling,and pot shots. Recognizing everyones opinion has some merit in one way or another might be a nice switch.
 
Kinda putting the cart before the horse. Maybe we should wait until the bill passes.

Besides, guys in favor of points would see our arguments, and counteract with large amount of comments against our suggestions.

JM77 will be watching this closely, and anything he doesn't like he will send an email out to his group saying make sure you go against XX.

So, you might be shooting yourself in the foot with your comments.
 
Ditto what G14 said!!! It's way too early to even think about making comments to the G&F when this Bill had to be watered down like it was just to get it out of Committee!
 
Not comments to game and fish. just start formulating ideas that can be backed in mass when the time come and I think it will.
 
I respectfully submit, based on the other comments we just gave, that this not be done out on an open Forum where the comments can be seen because of what G14 stated. It would only serve to do what he mentioned. IMHO we should still be looking at sending our comments to the Legislature so they have an idea of where the majority stands on this Bill before it's brought before them for discussion and a vote.
 
My comment is a 1%/99% split with 99% of the tags going to the general pool. Then we can get to the bottom of actually improving draw odds without destroying opportunites for youth hunters.

Remember Pref points do nothing to improve odds as they don't take applicants out of the pool or add permits!!!!!!!! These are the only two way to improve odds!!!!
 
>Remember Pref points do nothing to improve odds as they don't
>take applicants out of the pool or add permits!!!!!!!!
>These are the only two way to improve odds!!!!

Did they tell you that at the last Monster Muley anti PP pep rally? Pref points absolutely take applicants out of the pool. If yer a max point holder and you draw a tag, yer back to zero ain't ya? Yer essentially out of the pool until you work yer way back towards the top of the heap...
 
"Remember Pref points do nothing to improve odds as they don't take applicants out of the pool or add permits!!!!!!!! These are the only two way to improve odds!!!! "

I see why you're fedup.
 
"I see why you're fedup."

That's funny, and I even have to agree with Triple_BB in that PPs certainly do take applicants out of the pool once they draw their first choice tag and have to start all over again.
 
If you consider multi year periods, then preference point and bonus systems spread the tags out through a wider group of hunters than random draws do.
So the odds go up for those that haven't drawn before, and the odds go down for those that have.
 
Or those that come late to the game. For whatever the reason it will always detour those that might come play but realize they will never catch up. It is only a good situation for those with max points. (period)

DZ
 
YES P/Ps DRAW TAKE PEOPLE OUT OF THE DRAWING! If you are not at max points you do not apply for the top units, because statistically you do not have a chance. So you either wait or end up hunting a general area every 2 or 3 years. But you don't apply in the meantime. I would hate to think that I was a resident of Wyoming and basically every elk and mule deer tag in some of the best areas would basically be lifetime tags. Once I drew I would never draw that tag again. Think Arizona, Nevada. Residents can't even hunt their own state. At least now you have a chance of drawing. With p/ps system if you are not at max points and apply for an area of high demand YOU WILL NOT DRAW. With moderate demand you might draw once every 7-10 years. Go back to 0 and hope in that many years the herd and your health stays good so you can hunt again. Kids not old enough to buy points will likely be so far back they will be out of the running and never be able to do a father son/daughter hunt. Being a nonres and 2pts back in elk I finally realized what point creep, the point float, and doing the math realized I will never be able to draw any of the better units even once in my hunting ability lifetime. The worse part is I'm in my early 40's and will never draw that permit.

Random draw only. Bonus points next. At least with bonus points you still have a chance. Every Bonus point gets your name in the hat again. Can't get a bonus point unless you apply. don't apply for 2 years loose your bonus points. No banking. Get in the draw or your out.
 
>YES P/Ps DRAW TAKE PEOPLE OUT
>OF THE DRAWING! If
>you are not at max
>points you do not apply
>for the top units, because
>statistically you do not have
>a chance.

For the high draw odds areas, you statistically don't really have a chance with any system.


So you either
>wait or end up hunting
>a general area every 2
>or 3 years. But you
>don't apply in the meantime.
> I would hate to
>think that I was a
>resident of Wyoming and basically
>every elk and mule deer
>tag in some of the
>best areas would basically be
>lifetime tags. Once I drew
>I would never draw that
>tag again.

So, under a RAMDOM system, how many times in your life do you expect to draw a tag that has 5% chance of drawing? Each year is mutually exclusive of the previous years. Once in your life would probably be about right. So, if I were guaranteed it under another system, I'd darn sure evaluate that system.


>With moderate demand you might
>draw once every 7-10 years.
>Go back to 0 and
>hope in that many years
>the herd and your health
>stays good so you can
>hunt again. Kids not old
>enough to buy points will
>likely be so far back
>they will be out of
>the running and never be
>able to do a father
>son/daughter hunt. Being a
>nonres and 2pts back in
>elk I finally realized what
>point creep, the point float,
>and doing the math realized
>I will never be able
>to draw any of the
>better units even once in
>my hunting ability lifetime. The
>worse part is I'm in
>my early 40's and will
>never draw that permit.

You'll never draw "that" permit. There are a lot of good to great areas in Wyo that you CAN draw. My 2nd biggest elk to date was 360 & came from a general area. It did come from a wilderness area, but that's a different argument for NR's.
 
For the high draw odds areas, you statistically don't really have a chance with any system

Not true. Statistically you do have a chance. It might be big or small but at least you have a chance.

So, if I were guaranteed it under another system, I'd darn sure evaluate that system.

You are correct. PP's would guarantee you at least one tag if you got in at the start.

You'll never draw "that" permit. There are a lot of good to great areas in Wyo that you CAN draw. My 2nd biggest elk to date was 360 & came from a general area. It did come from a wilderness area, but that's a different argument for NR's.

Yep no argument about the wilderness areas. Might be for a nonres own good. Better know what you are gettin into. General areas with wilderness are for guides to set up shop in. Residents with the resources and know how to hunt in. This is what outfitters were originally meant to do. OUTFIT. Not lease up all available ground at any cost so nobody but them can hunt and make more money to lease up more and more ground. Think game pimps. No average guy res or nonres wins with that scenario. That is another whole debate.



Anybody want to PM me with all of these good areas for nonres without max points and not going to pay the "outfit" feel free. No doubt there are good spots. They are just that spots. Backyard sweetspots that if you live there and do your homework and time afield you will hopefully find. I too have that with whitetails.

I have spent time in Wyo. Looked at the top spots and it was happening. Looked at the lesser areas and it was , well keep looking.

Too bad the sport is becoming a pay to play exclusive sport. Good thing we don't have a problem getting young hunters into the sport. That too is another debate.
 
I guess that some of you are forgetting that supposedly 50% of the tags will go through the random draw process?

The proposed draw system will work quite well on the antelope tags, and I believe that is where the majority of applications will come from anyway.
The antelope draw is also where the problematic part of the random draw really shows up.
 
>With p/ps system if you are not at max points and apply for
>an area of high demand YOU WILL NOT DRAW.

So is this a situation where yer making comments because yer that unifmormed about what the bill or are you just trying to generate sentiment against it thinking folks can't read?

If you check out some of the other posts on this issue, you'll see something about 50%...
 
Triple_BB---I think you are taking his statement out of context. What he's saying is in any particular year that if there aren't at least as many tags for a unit as there are people with Max PPs that apply some of them and none of the people with less PPs will draw. This could happen one year or for many years in units that have very few tags, especially because a person can change from one unit to another from year to year. That really does not help a person when you look at the odds and think that you're close to drawing and then a bunch more people with max PPs apply for that unit the next year and therein comes point creep! This 50/50 deal they came up with in the amendment may at least satisfy some people that are on the fence or those that didn't want the entire system to go to only PPs.
 
WTH are you talking about topgun? if a person doesn't have max points then they are in the random draw, a 50-50 split means that half of the available tags go to just the lucky top point holders and half will go to everyone else.

The statement you are defending has never been true, Wyoming doesn't have a pure preference point system for either residents or nonresidents.
 
Topgun and Piper you are both right. Topgun that is what I was saying. Piper you are right the nonres draw is not a tru pref point system in that some, all though a very small sum, of the tags are allocated to the random draw. This is assuming that there are enough tags to the nonres to after the pp draw and the special draw have not used up the % allowed so there is still at least one available for the random draw. In the draw a certain % goes to the non res. This is % split with between the pp and special pp and the random, with a diff % going to each. Some of the random tags have over a 1000 appl trying for 1 tag. Some units have 0 random tags available due to the original % not having enough tags to have one for the random draw tag.

I'm kinda hopin I can move to Wyo and draw the best elk, mule deer and sheep tags with my pp's already in the bank.


LOL what a mess. No good solution. Remember guys we are all still sportsmen hopefully on the same side.
 
The other thing that many are forgetting is that the people with preference points are double-dipping.

The max point holders get a chance at 100% of the tags in any unit they apply for. They have the exclusive chance at the 50% reserved in the preference point pool, and they are also entered into the random draw as well.

If this pile of chit bill passes, which we're working hard to see that it doesnt, I'll push for the following:

1. Those with max points will NOT be considered in a random draw, period.

2. If any applicant draws a tag from the preference pool of tags, with less than max points, the entire point pool he drew from is not elegible for the random draw.

The only people that should be entered in the random draw are those that are not in a high enough point pool to potentially draw from the preference pool.
 
Preference points do not take anyone out of the pool. If we start with a 100 people applying for 10 tags. The first year I have a 10% chance of drawing. Assuming the next year I have the same 100 people apply (even know 10 people were successful) for the same amount of tags I still have overall odds of 10%.
Preference points work in ensuring a order that everyone will draw the LE permits in Wyoming but over a 25 year period pref points do nothing to improve your odds. That is if you are in the draw the first year the points are issued. If your not in the first year you will wait till everyone ahead of you draws before you get a decent chance for a tag. I'm super excited about telling my 4 yr old that due to Greed and a hastily ill thought out preference point system he will most probably wait till he is in his late 30's before drawing a LE deer or elk tag in Wyoming. I challenge any of you who say that preference points improve odds to produce a spreadsheet that shows any improvement of odds over a 20yr time period for any hunt area in the state.
The other retarded thing about preference points is there will be a sizable applicant increase the first year of the preference system. I was told that the first year Wyoming started the non resident point system there was a 15% increase in applicants. Talk about improving odds!!!! This will have the exact opposite affect of what we need to have happen.
Unlike some I'm not stating that the "random draw" is the fair way to issue tags, in fact I think that is nonsense too. We should just demand that the G&F, Legislators, and commisioners draw up a effective way to improve odds.

-Make people choose what LE species they want to put in for. Pick one species. You could still buy general season permits and particpate in 2nd round drawings for any of the other species that weren't your primary choice.

-Add waiting periods based on how hard the hunt area you are applying for is to draw ( if successfully drawn for a hunt area with <10% odds =10yr wait <20%=5yr wait <30% 3year wait, ,<40% 2 yr wait, and <60% a 1 year wait.
-Staggered draws; drawing le elk, then deer, then antelope to ensure people don't draw two LE tags in one yr.
A combination of the above proposals could actually improve odds for everyone, including youth and new hunters coming into the draw. A win, win for everyone.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 07:27AM (MST)[p]AZ only gives 20% of tags to the max pool guys, I understand how that could change the game.
A problem could possibly arise in the areas where the odds of drawing are in the 30%- 60% range, and a lot of pronghorn areas fall in that category.
 
>WTH are you talking about topgun?
> if a person
>doesn't have max points then
>they are in the random
>draw, a 50-50 split means
>that half of the available
>tags go to just the
>lucky top point holders and
>half will go to everyone
>else.
>
>The statement you are defending has
>never been true, Wyoming doesn't
>have a pure preference point
>system for either residents or
>nonresidents.


Lighten up piper! I was talking about the present NR system and not the proposed Res Bill!!! The NR system is exactly as was ststed in that if there are any tags left for the random draw you have a slim chance to draw in that one.
 
The way this bill is written with ten dollar points you can dominate the pool with $125 a year. People will do this if safe guards are not put in place! Then remember that these same folks can use the old non resident trick of applying for areas they wont draw with points and accrue a point then have a shot at the very same tag in the random draw and retain their points.
 
There are just too many things wrong with this bill and the current situation surrounding it. As mentioned I prefer and always have preferred the true random system.

I understand that status quo is not always popular, but neither are PP systems for many reasons. This thread show a great debate on the pros and cons of a system. The real issue comes down to are we willing to achieve the pros while accepting the cons?

For myself I am not. I am however open to other alternatives. Such as mandatory wait periods before being eligible to draw a certain tag again. Bonus Points System, a system where points are not averaged, a system where only 20% of tags go to top points holders and everyone else has an equal chance in random draw, a system where any tag drawn takes out your points. etc. there are just so many options, so many strong feelings and so much controversy that the state needs to really sit down and have a long well researched meaningful conversation between sportsmen, wildlife, and business to determine the most acceptable process. Right now the NR PP is OK, but it could be way better...
 
>The way this bill is written
>with ten dollar points you
>can dominate the pool with
>$125 a year. People will
>do this if safe guards
>are not put in place!
>Then remember that these same
>folks can use the old
>non resident trick of applying
>for areas they wont draw
>with points and accrue a
>point then have a shot
>at the very same tag
>in the random draw and
>retain their points.

Strang, please expound on your point.

If you put in for an area as 1st choice with max pref points and draw it, you lose your points. Not sure I'm following you. I do realize that you can draw a 2nd choice & not lose your pp's. Is that what you meant?
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 01:01PM (MST)[p]I don't know what he was talking about in that post Teepee because what he stated is not how the NR system works. You can put in for a tough to draw unit as a first choice and not lose your PPs if you don't draw it, but you certainly won't draw that same unit in the random as a first choice, gain another PP and retain them all.
 
He is referring to the averaging points issue. Basically if he can get 12 people on rotation. then he would always average out nicely for a tag that is somewhat difficult to draw. In this case he could dominate that pool. Always applying with someone with max points for 12 years. So he goes max points for 1st tag, then has 1/2 max points next year, then the next year 1/2 max points, then the next year 1/2 max, etc. I believe that is what he is looking at. End result, all tags are harder to get. The only option for parties should be lowest in the pot is the bases for all...
 
not 12 yourself and 4, not all tags harder to get jsut system is easily and cheaply manipulated. Same thine can be done on present non res system but gets expensive.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13
>AT 01:01?PM (MST)
>
>I don't know what he was
>talking about in that post
>Teepee because what he stated
>is not how the NR
>system works. You can
>put in for a tough
>to draw unit as a
>first choice and not lose
>your PPs if you don't
>draw it, but you certainly
>won't draw that same unit
>in the random as a
>first choice, gain another PP
>and retain them all.


Actually you can put in for the hardest unit to draw with a pref point app. be unsucessful. drop to random draw with same first choice and have same odds as all other random draw applicants and draw that tag and retain you points. Some folks draw that tag on random and it could be a pref point applicant that dropped from the pref point draw and that person retains his points as I understand it.
 
WRONG!! If you draw a tag with your first choice (regardless of the random or preference pool), your points go to zero.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13
>AT 01:01?PM (MST)
>
>I don't know what he was
>talking about in that post
>Teepee because what he stated
>is not how the NR
>system works. You can
>put in for a tough
>to draw unit as a
>first choice and not lose
>your PPs if you don't
>draw it, but you certainly
>won't draw that same unit
>in the random as a
>first choice, gain another PP
>and retain them all.


Where did you get the gain another point part? never posted that
 
yes, Elks, I think we all get the averaging concept and agree it needs to be addressed for res pp, because it's relatively inexpensive for a resident to gain points in a party application. But that is not what Strang is referring to. Least ways I don't think so.

No offense to the non-residents, but I also wrote to a number of legislators about non-residents being able to transfer a large number of preference points into the resident point system upon becoming a resident. (big assumption that the bill will pass.)

My opinion is that upon residency, a non resident with more than the max number of possible resident points could only equal and not exceed that number upon becoming a resident. An alternative process would be for a non-resident becoming a resident to have a option of applying as a non-resident.
 
I'd be willing to bet that the number of non-resident points transferred over to the resident pool will be so small that it will be statistically insignificant.
 
>
>Actually you can put in for
>the hardest unit to draw
>with a pref point app.
>be unsucessful. drop to random
>draw with same first choice
>and have same odds as
>all other random draw applicants
>and draw that tag and
>retain you points. Some folks
>draw that tag on random
>and it could be a
>pref point applicant that dropped
>from the pref point draw
>and that person retains his
>points as I understand it.

If you draw you're 1st choice, you lose your PP's regardless of how you got it.
 
Well if that is the case then so be it but yhe pref point guys still shouldnt drop to the random and get two shots. and the table I sent you still spplies in either case
 
If someone want to move for their points more power to them! Like you said it is insignificant
 
>>WTH are you talking about topgun?
>> if a person
>>doesn't have max points then
>>they are in the random
>>draw, a 50-50 split means
>>that half of the available
>>tags go to just the
>>lucky top point holders and
>>half will go to everyone
>>else.
>>
>>The statement you are defending has
>>never been true, Wyoming doesn't
>>have a pure preference point
>>system for either residents or
>>nonresidents.
>
>
>Lighten up piper! I was
>talking about the present NR
>system and not the proposed
>Res Bill!!! The NR
>system is exactly as was
>ststed in that if there
>are any tags left for
>the random draw you have
>a slim chance to draw
>in that one.


25% of the tags are reserved for the random draw
 
>Ditto what G14 said!!! It's
>way too early to even
>think about making comments to
>the G&F when this Bill
>had to be watered down
>like it was just to
>get it out of Committee!
>


I'm guessing five days was long enough to wait????
 
>I'd be willing to bet that
>the number of non-resident points
>transferred over to the resident
>pool will be so small
>that it will be statistically
>insignificant.

Overall, I agree that the overall number will be statistically insignificant compared to the overall number of residents. However, given a that few premium elk & deer tags only have a couple of tags, they could all go to "new" residents for years to come. I know of several people myself that are moving here upon retirement in the next year or so. Two have max points and only trophy hunt.
 
Maybe Game and Fish need to address that in regulation I will pass it along in summer committee
 
Next up pending the passing of this bill is the Wyoming Game and Fish comment period where they establish the regulation of the res. pref points. Perhaps this is an opportunity for this forum to shape how these preference points are administrated.
Should they be averaged as non res points are?
Should a non res with 7 pts move here and his points transfer moving him to the top of the heap?
Should a applicant have to choose between p/p and random draw? Should p/p pt applicants drop to the random draw if unsucessful and get a second shot at their first choice?
Should all three choices be considered before a license is suspended or just first choice
What steps should be taken to insure against manipulation of the p/p system?
Maybe this forum can generate a plan to administrate the optimum way to manage this new wrinkle in the res lic draw proceedure.
And maybe this can be done constructively without name calling,and pot shots. Recognizing everyones opinion has some merit in one way or another might be a nice switch.
 
Senate File 85 passed the House CoW, which is essentially the 1st reading. A question was asked about manipulating the system by applying as a party & building points through other people (i.e., averaging as discussed above.) The legislators totally didn't even get the question & discounted it by saying that if one in the party draws, they all draw. That is true, but wasn't the concern that has been raised. Looks like it likely is headed towards passing. Wasn't 5 minutes of debate. FYI, the audio is on the web.
 
>Just curious as to which trophy
>deer and elk areas only
>have a couple of tags?
>

I was thinking about Deer 82 (Baggs) & 59 elk (Cody). For the 82 tag, there were 8 tags & 342 applicants (2% chance). Very highly coveted tag. About ditto for area 78 deer. For Elk 59 (migration hunt), there were 9 tags.

So, say the PP bill passes. Hypothetically, in 2 years, say 4 "New Residents" apply for Deer Area 82,each with 5-7 pref points, while the max for residents is one. Question: Should they each be given probably the most coveted trophy mule deer tag in the state? Hell, I'd pay well just to get to apply with them as a party! I hear some non-residents that are thinking about moving to Wyo going "Ka-ching". :)
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 04:41PM (MST)[p]Deer area 82 (late) is no longer starting this year. It is no longer listed on the LQ list. I bet 78, 79, 80, and 81 (late) are getting cut with the general season going to limited quota.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 06:09PM (MST)[p] I'm concerned about the nonresident point transfer thing, it could mean that longtime residents wouldn't ever have much of a chance to draw areas like 113-123-124 elk, even areas like 130 deer and some antelope units could be effected.
 
strang---The following are your quotes and my answers (***):

"Actually you can put in for the hardest unit to draw with a pref point app. be unsucessful. drop to random draw with same first choice and have same odds as all other random draw applicants and draw that tag and retain you points. Some folks draw that tag on random and it could be a pref point applicant that dropped from the pref point draw and that person retains his points as I understand it."

***You understand it wrong and are incorrect bacause you lose your PPs if you draw your first choice, regardless of whether you draw the tag in the PP draw or in the random draw if you drop into it and get lucky.

"Then remember that these same folks can use the old non resident trick of applying for areas they won't draw with points and accrue a point then have a shot at the very same tag in the random draw and retain their points."

***This is where you said you could accrue a PP and retain them all!
 
Non-residents ALREADY have much better drawing odds in most units than residents do including just about every deer unit. The only people that seem to oppose a common-sense point system are:

1). Those who have very fortunate luck with the random draw who are too selfish to see their good luck change to a system that rewards those who deserve the tags the most by applying the longest.

Or

2).The self-proclaimed "expert" statisticians who, in all likely hood, have nothing more than a Good Enough Diploma (GED) or a community college education yet are dumb enough to believe a "random" system is really random and fair for all. These people could care less about any body else as long as they can keep drawing tags each year. They know a pp system would take their good luck away from them and give those tags to those who can't draw $hit in the random draw.
 
Besides, if a non-resident moves to Wyoming they can start at ZERO just like every other WY resident. If they have a problem with this they can choose to burn their points before they move.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 07:26PM (MST)[p]>2).The self-proclaimed "expert" statisticians who, in
>all likely hood, have nothing
>more than a Good Enough
>Diploma (GED) or a community
>college education yet are dumb
>enough to believe a "random"
>system is really random and
>fair for all.

Due to the "Enlightened Educated One", I'm changing my position on preference points.

I guess if you have a diploma from a high school you are okay?

These people
>could care less about any
>body else as long as
>they can keep drawing tags
>each year.

Same thing could be said about the guys in favor of PP.

yet are dumb
>enough to believe a "random"
>system is really random and
>fair for all.

So a random system is not random, and not fair to all? Who is it not fair to? Again, I am dumb, so forgive my ignorance.
 
I am a resident and I have points. Unless it is written into this new PP scheme. I will jump to the head of the PP game. I hope it dosen't pass but whatever. Too many people believe the PP game is the answer. I would bet in a few short years (after they draw there once in a 20 year tag) they will relize the PP system sucks.
 
"The legislators totally didn't even get the question & discounted it by saying that if one in the party draws, they all draw. That is true, but wasn't the concern that has been raised."

This is what you get when uneducated legislators make your game laws.
 
Ok just to clarify, I said pp's will take people out of the draw. That means the state won't get their app fee for people that won't put in because they don't have a chance to draw a tag. They will instead point bank. This means a loss in revenue. The same amount of people will still be in the pool just not applying until they feel they can draw a tag. This is the FLOAT. Point creep is every year due to more people at max and not enough tags to reduce or maintain this number means that the pionts to draw will increase.

My understanding and the draw demand index will back this up is that there are 2 draws in Wyo for the nonres. 1 is the pref pt draw and the other is the random. pps are only used in the pp draw, regular or special price. Random is just that random. Random will not burn your points. A % of the tags is allocated to each of these 3 drawings. I can't enter into more than 1 of these drawings as I have to specify which one I'm applying for. If all apps are then entered into the random draw as a first choice if unsuccessful in the pp draw I am not aware of that. Sounds crazy. Maybe, though I don't know. I have thought about entering in the random draw while waiting for enough points to draw in the pp draw. Hey someone has to draw that tag right.

The thing about this is after reading some of the recent posts is does anyone really know how this works? How many angles and ways to manipulate this are there. Now if you go to low cost pts and ability to turn tags back in and maintain pts, wow lookout.

There are so many scenarios and things to try and control to maintain some sort of fairness you will never be able to write enough rules. Seems like the more you try to level the playing field the more tilted it becomes.
 
People move from utah every day in rocksprings. Good jobs in wyoming. When you have 124 elk with a handful of resident tags {after the landowners get their cut} a couple of nonresidents move here and it is statistically signifigant.
Just another reason to hate this pos legislation!
 
>Ok just to clarify, I said
>pp's will take people out
>of the draw. That
>means the state won't get
>their app fee for people
>that won't put in because
>they don't have a chance
>to draw a tag. They
>will instead point bank.
>This means a loss in
>revenue. The same amount of
>people will still be in
>the pool just not applying
>until they feel they can
>draw a tag. This
>is the FLOAT. Point creep
>is every year due to
>more people at max and
>not enough tags to reduce
>or maintain this number means
>that the pionts to draw
>will increase.
>
>My understanding and the draw demand
>index will back this up
>is that there are 2
>draws in Wyo for the
>nonres. 1 is the pref
>pt draw and the other
>is the random. pps are
>only used in the pp
>draw, regular or special price.
>Random is just that random.
>Random will not burn your
>points. A % of the
>tags is allocated to each
>of these 3 drawings. I
>can't enter into more than
>1 of these drawings as
>I have to specify which
>one I'm applying for. If
>all apps are then
>entered into the random draw
>as a first choice if
>unsuccessful in the pp draw
>I am not aware of
>that. Sounds crazy. Maybe, though
>I don't know. I have
>thought about entering in the
>random draw while waiting for
>enough points to draw in
>the pp draw. Hey someone
>has to draw that tag
>right.
>
>The thing about this is after
>reading some of the recent
>posts is does anyone really
>know how this works? How
>many angles and ways to
>manipulate this are there. Now
>if you go to low
>cost pts and ability to
>turn tags back in and
>maintain pts, wow lookout.
>
>There are so many scenarios and
>things to try and control
>to maintain some sort of
>fairness you will never be
>able to write enough rules.
>Seems like the more you
>try to level the playing
>field the more tilted it
>becomes.


*** You are mistaken on a number of things in your post regarding the NR PP system. First off, you can apply only for either the Regular or Special PP draw if you have have PPs and depending on how much money you want to spend. You do not have a choice of going directly into the random draw and skipping the PP draws. All applicants go into the PP draw first, regardless of whether they have PPs or not. Therefore, if there are enough tags in a unit to satisfy all the PP applicants it is possible to actually draw a tag in that initial draw with no PPs. After the PP draws are held then everyone left that hasn't drawn a tag goes into the random draw for those remaining tags. If a person with PPs draws one of those tags, even though PPs are not used because it's a true random draw, he still loses his PPs if it was his first choice. That is fact and something that a lot of people do not realize.
 
Anyone who knows a thing or two about computers will tell you that is is impossible for ANY computer to do a task that is truly 100% random. Need I say more? No one should go fifteen years empty handed to pull a tag with 1:3 odds while others draw every other year. Preference points balance the distribution out EVENLY to EVERYONE. You pretend this is NOT a fair system because after you draw your tag you don't like the idea of going back to the end of the line...

And why did nearly every state with the exception of NM and ID adopted a point system? You really believe its because pp's don't work?

BTW, I appreciate your effort to stay in school and get yourself that high school diploma. Unfortunately not too many of our fellow residents can say that!
 
Idaho sportsmen successfully beat back their legislature's efforts 2 or 3 years ago to impose a PP system on them. Might be worthwhile to research how/why sportsmen succeeded there.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-12-13 AT 09:16PM (MST)[p]>
>Anyone who knows a thing or
>two about computers will tell
>you that is is impossible
>for ANY computer to do
>a task that is truly
>100% random. Need I say
>more? No one should go
>fifteen years empty handed to
>pull a tag with 1:3
>odds while others draw every
>other year. Preference points balance
>the distribution out EVENLY to
>EVERYONE. You pretend this is
>NOT a fair system because
>after you draw your tag
>you don't like the idea
>of going back to the
>end of the line...
>
>And why did nearly every state
>with the exception of NM
>and ID adopted a point
>system? You really believe its
>because pp's don't work?
>
>BTW, I appreciate your effort to
>stay in school and get
>yourself that high school diploma.
>Unfortunately not too many of
>our fellow residents can say
>that!


***First off, your statement needs to be backed up with statistics and not just because you say so or because a person didn't draw a tag for a certain unit over a length of time. That is exactly why it's a random system because any one person might draw every year and then again he might never draw. Second, just because other states have PP systems doesn't mean they're working the way they were originally intended. In fact, if you do a little investigation you'll find that just about every state has as many people that don't like their system as do. One big reason states establish PP systems is it's a BIG MONEY MAKER!!!
 
>>Ok just to clarify, I said
>>pp's will take people out
>>of the draw. That
>>means the state won't get
>>their app fee for people
>>that won't put in because
>>they don't have a chance
>>to draw a tag. They
>>will instead point bank.
>>This means a loss in
>>revenue. The same amount of
>>people will still be in
>>the pool just not applying
>>until they feel they can
>>draw a tag. This
>>is the FLOAT. Point creep
>>is every year due to
>>more people at max and
>>not enough tags to reduce
>>or maintain this number means
>>that the pionts to draw
>>will increase.
>>
>>My understanding and the draw demand
>>index will back this up
>>is that there are 2
>>draws in Wyo for the
>>nonres. 1 is the pref
>>pt draw and the other
>>is the random. pps are
>>only used in the pp
>>draw, regular or special price.
>>Random is just that random.
>>Random will not burn your
>>points. A % of the
>>tags is allocated to each
>>of these 3 drawings. I
>>can't enter into more than
>>1 of these drawings as
>>I have to specify which
>>one I'm applying for. If
>>all apps are then
>>entered into the random draw
>>as a first choice if
>>unsuccessful in the pp draw
>>I am not aware of
>>that. Sounds crazy. Maybe, though
>>I don't know. I have
>>thought about entering in the
>>random draw while waiting for
>>enough points to draw in
>>the pp draw. Hey someone
>>has to draw that tag
>>right.
>>
>>The thing about this is after
>>reading some of the recent
>>posts is does anyone really
>>know how this works? How
>>many angles and ways to
>>manipulate this are there. Now
>>if you go to low
>>cost pts and ability to
>>turn tags back in and
>>maintain pts, wow lookout.
>>
>>There are so many scenarios and
>>things to try and control
>>to maintain some sort of
>>fairness you will never be
>>able to write enough rules.
>>Seems like the more you
>>try to level the playing
>>field the more tilted it
>>becomes.
>
>
>*** You are mistaken on a
>number of things in your
>post regarding the NR PP
>system. First off, you
>can apply only for either
>the Regular or Special PP
>draw if you have have
>PPs and depending on how
>much money you want to
>spend. You do not
>have a choice of going
>directly into the random draw
>and skipping the PP draws.
> All applicants go into
>the PP draw first, regardless
>of whether they have PPs
>or not. Therefore, if
>there are enough tags in
>a unit to satisfy all
>the PP applicants it is
>possible to actually draw a
>tag in that initial draw
>with no PPs. After
>the PP draws are held
>then everyone left that hasn't
>drawn a tag goes into
>the random draw for those
>remaining tags. If a
>person with PPs draws one
>of those tags, even though
>PPs are not used because
>it's a true random draw,
>he still loses his PPs
>if it was his first
>choice. That is fact and
>something that a lot of
>people do not realize.


You forgot to mention that 25% of the tags are added in before the random draw is conducted. Originally they were setasides for those with no points now a person with 7 points who is unsucessful in the p/p draw gets a socond chance with more tags added not just tags left over from the pref pt draw
 
I do feel resident and non-resident hunting and fishing fees SHOULD be increased. If the G&F make money from a point system so be it.
 
>
>And why did nearly every state
>with the exception of NM
>and ID adopted a point
>system? You really believe its
>because pp's don't work?
>

Simple, money. It was a way to supplement the G&F agencies budget problems.

>No one should go
>fifteen years empty handed to
>pull a tag with 1:3
>odds while others draw every
>other year.

I am unaware of anyone who went 15 years without drawing with 33.33% draw odds. I think you may be over exaggerating.
 
G14

"Every state" has larger populations of resident hunters. If Wyoming had over a 1000000 resident sportsmen. I would probably conceed that you have to have some kind of point system. Fact is since we have <300000 people in Wyoming that identify themselves as hunters we have other options. I would also be less opposed a nevada style bonus point system than the preference system that is being proposed. Fact is Wyoming and Colorado are pretty much the only state with preference system.
NV=bonus point squared
Utah=bonus 50/50 split
Montana bonus point with a non resident cap
It is a bad idea in Wyoming.
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-13 AT 10:46PM (MST)[p]
Fedup,

I'm confused. I'm not sure which post you were responding to as I didn't really write any of my opinions on this thread. I replied to Juniper81 sarcastically, and then wrote about the G&F wanting PP for revenue generating reasons.

I am against PP, as I believe you are. I would prefer to leave it as is. However, if we had to choose, I would prefer a Nevada bonus system. Of course, with this legislation we don't have a choice. Have a good one.

Please write our reps and tell them no. Might be a little late, but you never know.

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
 

Similar threads

DuaneZ
What to look for?
Replies
16
Views
1k
DuaneZ
DuaneZ
BrowningRage
Recommendation Gen Season Rifle Deer for family?
Replies
1
Views
491
BrowningRage
BrowningRage
Simpleton
Mule Deer Proposal
2 3
Replies
218
Views
6k
Vanilla
Vanilla

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

DSCN0024.JPG
IMG_1339.jpg
82229B12-BD2D-4DE3-8528-2D89C5F274BF.jpeg
IMG1.jpg
948D4392-725F-40E3-B3DF-A311E6D5D7F7.jpeg
5388F3A5-1930-427F-AE84-9ABA1D75D815.jpeg
99 buck.jpg
7BCF04FC-818F-4307-9BFC-F8BAE4EDB202.jpeg
20190916_193617.jpg
7.jpg
FDF5FD4B-070B-4A96-AC88-AEF4B9F40747.jpeg
028 (2).JPG

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom