States with points need a re-boot

[Bluehair]

JP, don’t worry. You’ll get your chance to screw the next generation; it’s the natural order of things. But until all the boomers get their chance to buy that deer you’re paying for, you’ll just have to keep paying for our excesses.

And the millennials will never be taken seriously until they get off their parents cell phone plan.

 

[HikeHunt61]

And the millennials will never be taken seriously until they get off their parents cell phone plan.

Now that's funny right there.

 

[Thill]

Okay - I am wrong, either way I would have drawn the tag several years okay if they hadn't changed the system. I was trapped and should have applied the points to different great hunt.

My money, my error.

States that charge these type of fees using a preference point system punish the NR.

 

[Zim]

Another “investor “ .

How much you guys wann bet we could search his comments on here and find all sorts a “ future of hunting” type concerns? Guess we’ll worry about those behind us only after we get ours. That’ll work

"you guys"? You one of those dudes that wear an Izod shirt with turned up collar depending on your frat boy bruthas to have ur back? You didn't address my comment about there being 12+ Utah welfare/prostitution tags EVERY YEAR to be had compared to the one available to NR DIYers. Why doesn't your reform plan attack the 12 rather than one (1)? It seems that would be far more inline with your Socialist ideology?

 

[roadrunner]

Supply

Demand

Call it whatever you want. It's not the same thing as "Supply & Demand" the way it's trying to be used...

 

[JPickett]

"you guys"? You one of those dudes that wear an Izod shirt with turned up collar depending on your frat boy bruthas to have ur back? You didn't address my comment about there being 12+ Utah welfare/prostitution tags EVERY YEAR to be had compared to the one available to NR DIYers. Why doesn't your reform plan attack the 12 rather than one (1)? It seems that would be far more inline with your Socialist ideology?

Don’t think I’ll put much weight to comments about ideology from a guy who lives in China. But anyway, Ive said the whole system is stupid. I know it’s a lot of brain power to understand that might include whatever 12 tags you’re talking about but I promise, “whole system” means all of it

 

[chrisamx]

Investing in points is same as investing in a ponzi scheme. Its a money maker for someone, but hasn't paid off for me.

 

[JPickett]

Call it whatever you want. It's not the same thing as "Supply & Demand" the way it's trying to be used...

I actually don’t think I’ve used that term at all just seen guys on here post it. Only reason I commented was your post trying to look smarter than everyone else after you googled an economic term. I found it entertaining

 

[roadrunner]

I actually don’t think I’ve used that term at all just seen guys on here post it. Only reason I commented was your post trying to look smarter than everyone else after you googled an economic term. I found it entertaining

Not trying to look smarter than anyone. If people are going to use terminology, at least do it in the context it's used in.

To say "demand is high and supply is low" suggests a price point to increase to reduce quantity demanded, or to increase the amount available at the same price point.

Neither are likely to happen which is why it's incorrect to use when speaking about tag availability based on a resource that cannot be controlled outside its own independence.

Simple economics, I didn't make the rules...

 

[Vanilla]

The only sure thing in all this is that whatever the system is there will be those that &!$&@ about it. No matter what!

Change the system tomorrow and the same people will still be complaining. It is who they are and what they do.

It’s the only sure thing in any of this.

 

[schoolhousegrizz]

It gets harder and harder for every generation to draw tags. I didn't get to ride a horse across the west and select my own land for free either. It's just the way things go, it is fine. Leave the point systems alone. I like the different varieties across the west. Agree we need to grow more deer!

 

[HikeHunt61]

To say "demand is high and supply is low" suggests a price point to increase to reduce quantity demanded, or to increase the amount available at the same price point.

Neither are likely to happen which is why it's incorrect to use when speaking about tag availability based on a resource that cannot be controlled outside its own independence.

Pretty sure the laws of supply and demand play a big part.

Certainly not universally but take Wyoming's "special" licenses as an example. That is a direct action with the laws of supply and demand in mind. They raise the prices above the "acceptable" level based on known demand- and limited supply. They raise those prices more than they raise regular prices since the demand will accommodate it.

Heck- even the 10x higher nonresident fees in each state are what they are due to economics- supply and demand. If no nonresidents wanted licenses, they couldn't possibly sell them at those higher prices.

Now- it's not a completely free market with open competition- that much is true (except for those few auctioned tags).

 

[Bluehair]

Not trying to look smarter than anyone.

You can relax too.

 

[idahomuleyhunter]

Not trying to look smarter than anyone. If people are going to use terminology, at least do it in the context it's used in.

To say "demand is high and supply is low" suggests a price point to increase to reduce quantity demanded, or to increase the amount available at the same price point.

Neither are likely to happen which is why it's incorrect to use when speaking about tag availability based on a resource that cannot be controlled outside its own independence.

Simple economics, I didn't make the rules...

Economics exist even in fascist/socialist systems(command economies). The US model of hunting is a command economic system, the government controls the resource. Like trying to get an MRI in Canada, better get in line now for that arm you might break next year. And like most command economies corruption seeps in to the benefit of those with influence: outfitters, well moneyed auctions bidders, and yes the grey hairs who had the foresight to create a pyramid scheme for their own benefit. Hunters of all Western States unite, comrades.

 

[roadrunner]

Pretty sure the laws of supply and demand play a big part.

Certainly not universally but take Wyoming's "special" licenses as an example. That is a direct action with the laws of supply and demand in mind. They raise the prices above the "acceptable" level based on known demand- and limited supply. They raise those prices more than they raise regular prices since the demand will accommodate it.

Heck- even the 10x higher nonresident fees in each state are what they are due to economics- supply and demand. If no nonresidents wanted licenses, they couldn't possibly sell them at those higher prices.

Now- it's not a completely free market with open competition- that much is true (except for those few auctioned tags).

No. They are raising the prices simply because they can much like "price gouging" because they know people will pay. It has nothing to do with any kind of a market condition of people wanting vs what's available. If NR's didn't want them, they would simply charge more to R's or not at all. Hardly subject to the Laws of S & D.


Supply and demand doesn't apply because the same amount of tags will be allocated at a set price regardless if 10,000 people want them or 100,000.

Those tags are not subject to inputs the same way other commodities are where supply and demand principles apply that are dependent on labor and supply chain management. Tag numbers are based solely on conditions mostly outside of human control.

 

[notdonhunting]

We keep saying the odds are getting worse, and to some extent, they are but not drastically on most units, at least in Utah.
I just pulled up the odds on the Manti early season any rifle. 2012, there were 131 permits resident, odds-1 in 21. In 2015,134 permits odds-1 in 22, and it took at least 14 bonus points to be in the bonus point pool. 2020, 127 permits, odds-1 in 26, and it took 17 bonus points. 2022, 140 permits, odds- 1 in 28.
Manti is one of the top two units for applications and permit numbers.
I really do not see a extreme problem with the odds on the Manti. In ten years the permit numbers went up by 9 and the odds got worst by by 7.
And yes they kill multiple 400 class bulls off of the Manti year in and year out.

 

[roadrunner]

Economics exist even in fascist/socialist systems(command economies). The US model of hunting is a command economic system, the government controls the resource. Like trying to get an MRI in Canada, better get in line now for that arm you might break next year. And like most command economies corruption seeps in to the benefit of those with influence: outfitters, well moneyed auctions bidders, and yes the grey hairs who had the foresight to create a pyramid scheme for their own benefit. Hunters of all Western States unite, comrades.

Yes, economics applies. Supply and demand doesn't. Economics goes much further beyond just wanting and giving.

In the case of hunting in the USA, it's more along the line of marginal utility.

 

[idahomuleyhunter]

Yes, economics applies. Supply and demand doesn't. Economics goes much further beyond just wanting and giving.

In the case of hunting in the USA, it's more along the line of marginal utility.

No it is in fact supply and demand. There are a lot of fixed supply commodities in the world. Or commodities that have diminishing returns on incremental supply. Oil being the most obvious. And there is a cartel that effectively(not always so) controls enough output to set the price. Nature fixes(for the most part) the supply of game but the demand is a function desire, cost, and the political nature of a game commission. The demand is multifaceted but that doesn't mean it isn't demand. Supply and demand also goes beyond wanting and giving, not all demands can be met with equivalent and/or interchangeable supply.

 

[trimtab473]

Since opinions are like a-holes (everyone has one) I figured I’d throw mine out there.

All tags 25% preference/top points. 75% random draw.

Don’t care on re issue for tags given back but if you get a re issue tag you burn your points.

If you give your tag back for anything you get your points back, minus one for the year.

If you return your tag because you are active military on deployment. You get your points back but not plus one for the year,

Cool down periods for all species even a year for deer.

90/10 resident split. No lifetime license loopholes.

I’d apply and feel ok in a structure like that.

I also realize how worthless it is to post my opinion on here as things are pretty much here to stay as is.

 

[HikeHunt61]

No. They are raising the prices simply because they can much like "price gouging" because they know people will pay. It has nothing to do with any kind of a market condition of people wanting vs what's available. If NR's didn't want them, they would simply charge more to R's or not at all. Hardly subject to the Laws of S & D.


Supply and demand doesn't apply because the same amount of tags will be allocated at a set price regardless if 10,000 people want them or 100,000.

Those tags are not subject to inputs the same way other commodities are where supply and demand principles apply that are dependent on labor and supply chain management. Tag numbers are based solely on conditions mostly outside of human control.

No. The prices are definitely affected by demand. And supply being less than demand allows for price "gouging". If the demand wasn't there, they couldn't get the high prices. If the supply was massive, the price would be lower. It's really simple. It's basic supply and demand principles. Not even sure at this point how one could argue otherwise- but I'll let'er go...

 

[Bluehair]

Price controls imposed by goobermint based on what the resource costs to manage, not the price the market would dictate.

A capitalist free-for-all every year for every tag would be very entertaining. Viva la auction.

Beware the lectures on economics here.

 

[hossblur]

JP, don’t worry. You’ll get your chance to screw the next generation; it’s the natural order of things. But until all the boomers get their chance to buy that deer you’re paying for, you’ll just have to keep paying for our excesses.

And the millennials will never be taken seriously until they get off their parents cell phone plan.

I just assume the yard will be covered in tiny houses at my place?

 

[HikeHunt61]

Beware the lectures on economics here.

Wow. Bringing BH and RR together- warms my heart. We've come full circle! LOL...

 

[hossblur]

Price controls imposed by goobermint based on what the resource costs to manage, not the price the market would dictate.

A capitalist free-for-all every year for every tag would be very entertaining. Viva la auction.

Beware the lectures on economics here.

That whole N American model with wildlife being held by the CITIZENS, while socialism, is supposedly the model.

But everyone, especially socialists, are for sale

 

[Zim]

Don’t think I’ll put much weight to comments about ideology from a guy who lives in China. But anyway, Ive said the whole system is stupid. I know it’s a lot of brain power to understand that might include whatever 12 tags you’re talking about but I promise, “whole system” means all of it

Wow that’s a stretch claiming a guy lives somewhere when he only visits 3 weeks/year! Try doing that in AZ for a LL and see how far it gets ya. I do know it doesn’t take a lot of brain power to make an avatar as stupid as yours.

 

[JPickett]

Wow that’s a stretch claiming a guy lives somewhere when he only visits 3 weeks/year! Try doing that in AZ for a LL and see how far it gets ya. I do know it doesn’t take a lot of brain power to make an avatar as stupid as yours.

And yet the only one of us who has a dumb face in theirs that actually belongs to them is you….

 

[marburg]

Heard a podcast the other day, the discussion of point systems came up. I have always been a huge advocate of point systems, but it is and has become painfully obvious that the supply and demand for tags has become too high to justify any point system. Youth coming up have a near zero percent chance to draw any highly sought after tag with a point system. I have pushed for and been an advocate for point systems such as Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona. Where they have a point system in place that still allows for some level of random draw.
I have given a few on here a rash of sh*t over my reasons in support of point systems.
My tune has completely changed. We have got to get away from point systems. Even states with general tags are becoming near impossible to draw tags within a reasonable amount of time and getting worse.
How do we get away from points? End it now, no more points issued. Allow those with points to be washed out of the system. Square there points, or whatever strategy you use to give those with points some sort of advantage because of their investment. (not my idea, but a sensible one).
I also support some sort of waiting period after you draw a tag is a fair idea, maybe a couple years.
It's a tough deal, in my home state of Utah tags have become harder to draw each year, even general elk tags are becoming much more difficult to obtain.
Every state for that matter gets worse every year. Someone starting out applying for tags right now has about a zero percent chance of catching up to a certain number of tags, and getting worse every year.
Even whitetail states like Iowa, Kansas are beginning to see the slippery slope of point systems. Points are not the answer, and in the long run a determent to our hunting heritage.
Think its time for a wake up call. I don't like it, I really like the idea behind point systems. Pay your dues, build up points to draw a tag. But the demand is to high, and these systems all but cut out an entire segment of up and coming hunters. Who will never have a chance to draw certain tags, and getting worse.

Everyone that has drawn their points tags now wants points gone.

 

[eelgrass]

I remember when Nevada first offered nonresident antelope tags. I drew 2 tags in 4 years. Very few people knew about it and we tried to keep it quiet. Now everything is spread like wildfire on social media. Too many people are obsessed with drawing a tag. They don't care where or for what, they just want bragging rights that they got the tag. It's a game within the game.

 

[Vanilla]

Everyone that has drawn their points tags now wants points gone.

Not everyone…

 

[chrisamx]

I remeber when a guy could drive over to WY and get an OTC tag for elk, deer or antelope...not much money to be made that way.

 

[roadrunner]

No it is in fact supply and demand. There are a lot of fixed supply commodities in the world. Or commodities that have diminishing returns on incremental supply. Oil being the most obvious. And there is a cartel that effectively(not always so) controls enough output to set the price. Nature fixes(for the most part) the supply of game but the demand is a function desire, cost, and the political nature of a game commission. The demand is multifaceted but that doesn't mean it isn't demand. Supply and demand also goes beyond wanting and giving, not all demands can be met with equivalent and/or interchangeable supply.

Nope. Study a supply and demand curve and you'll see why it doesn't apply the way most people thinks it does. Available tags will be what they are regardless of who wants them and regardless of the price. The price and number of tags is not set to achieve market equilibrium. Saying supply is liw and demand is high relative to hunting tags is empty and meaningless.

No. The prices are definitely affected by demand. And supply being less than demand allows for price "gouging". If the demand wasn't there, they couldn't get the high prices. If the supply was massive, the price would be lower. It's really simple. It's basic supply and demand principles. Not even sure at this point how one could argue otherwise- but I'll let'er go...

Nope. Study a supply and demand curve and you'll see why. The price is affected by the perceived value of the tag, not because it's supply is limited. It's obvious the demand is always there, that's a no duh thing, even if the the supply equaled the demand, the price stays the same...

 

[WapitiBob]

Everyone that has drawn their points tags now wants points gone.

Or an "overhaul".

 

[huntazido]

I'm ok with the way things are in the west. I can either play by their rules or not play at all. My choice.

 

[chrisamx]

I'm ok with the way things are in the west. I can either play by their rules or not play at all. My choice.

The rules were developed years ago by a guy named Ponzi. The rules are made up to make someone, or entity, money. Fairness has zero to do with it.

 

[Wyogstew1]

Here is an idea: what if states not only allowed you to apply for a specific hunt, but also allowed you to apply for a future year? To do so, there would need to be a baseline number of designated tags for a future year, and a certain number for a year would be available every year. For example, you apply for a 2030 hunt in 2024. The 2030 quota available in 2024 would be 10 tags, and the same in 2025, etc. Granted, conditions change, so today's quotas could be very different for a hunt years down the road. Nevertheless, most units will likely have relatively stable populations, especially when compared with historical data, so that a conservative quotas could be authorized every year for future years.

A couple benefits would be to spread the applications out not just over units, but also years. Hunters could better plan for those trophy hunts so they know in 5 years they have a certain hunt squared up. Also, hunters could pay today's tag prices for future hunts. Also, hunters could get rid of points now in anticipation of that future hunt, but could also start over with points for easier to draw hunts in the meantime.

Clearly something needs to give for making hunts easier to draw. As mentioned, there is a supply and demand problem, so if we spread out the supply, that would decrease demand thereby affording greater statistical probability of drawing a certain tag.