Fill out Idaho survey.....

[Steelhead]

How about you just look at how terrible draws odds and point creep are for the top hunts in CO, OR and WA...

 

[fowladdict]

The reason draw odds are so low in Idaho is because the vast majority of units are OVER THE COUNTER- GENERAL SEASON! So we have few premium draw hunts. This is why we can't compare Idaho to most other states when it comes to draw systems.

THIS!! It is tiring hearing people say things like "At least in NV I know I will draw about every third year". If the entire state of Idaho were draw tags, odds likely wouldn't be bad when it comes to drawing a tag. BUT everyone can hunt every year!! So far the biggest ID animals I've seen posted on HT/facebook have been over the counter tags.

 

[Duck-Slayer]

Even though, I'm relatively new - I still would prefer someone who has been applying 20 years to draw a head of me. They have sacrificed and earned the right to hunt that area through years of diligence and disappointment.

You have serious problems..... nobody! and I mean nobody! has more of a right too hunt than the next guy or gal..... That simple.... points of any kind is unfair period.... there's no "but's" "if's" or "exceptions" you really need too listen too yourself.... sound's like too me your pretty selfish and think that since you throw money at draw's every year your better than those that don't.... please.... go stroke your high horse somewhere else...... :W:
Matt

 

[TheTone]

How about you just look at how terrible draws odds and point creep are for the top hunts in CO, OR and WA...

And WY and UT and AZ and...Heck its every state with a point system.

 

[idahofishnhunt]

It would be nice if we could just get the prices raised on licenses and tags without the additional nonsense being attached to it...like the landowner tags. I'm all for that, and I think most are that understand that this department needs funds to do what they do.

As for points...I believe strongly in no points for residents, as for non-residents, I don't see that as a problem, it just gives Idaho more money for those that have no problem dumping all this money into points in different states. The problem is in doing this if Idaho decided to take a certain percentage of the tags and allocate them to non-residents because of this point system they were having them do.

Why are we consistently fighting these same battles every year...raising prices, and implementing points, and landowner tags. It's tiring for sure.

 

[TheTone]

It would be nice if we could just get the prices raised on licenses and tags without the additional nonsense being attached to it...like the landowner tags. I'm all for that, and I think most are that understand that this department needs funds to do what they do.

As for points...I believe strongly in no points for residents, as for non-residents, I don't see that as a problem, it just gives Idaho more money for those that have no problem dumping all this money into points in different states. The problem is in doing this if Idaho decided to take a certain percentage of the tags and allocate them to non-residents because of this point system they were having them do.

Why are we consistently fighting these same battles every year...raising prices, and implementing points, and landowner tags. It's tiring for sure.

Call a bunch of south Idaho legislators and tell them these exact things, that's where the heavy opposition to raising fees is and the strong push for points and auction tags is coming from.

 

[NoWiser]

Going to a point system in Idaho would definitely benefit me. It would be the only state I would be able to get in on the ground floor and, therefore, have a chance at top tags. That said, this nonresident thinks it's about the dumbest idea I've recently heard. Maybe that's because I know what it feels like to get started in western hunting and suddenly realize that I will never draw a premium tag in any state except New Mexico and Idaho.

I guess it's only "fair" that those who grew up out west and knew the system (or had parents with the knowledge and money to start buying points for their them when they were young) have a chance to hunt the best units. If you grew up poor or with no knowledge of western hunting, you should forever be punished with lower draw odds.

It is fun to collect points and dream about using them to draw awesome tags. What would be even more fun would be actually having a chance to draw those tags every year....

 

[idnative1948]

Very well put Buzz.

I hope the Idaho hunters fight off the Ponzi scheme of bonus or preference points.

The only fair system is a random draw, every year. Anything other than that is, in fact, taking opportunity away from one party and giving it to another....that simple.

Like many others on the board here, I've been playing the point game going on 20 years in most all the Western States. The longer I apply, the more I realize just how unfair preference and bonus point systems really are. Its 100% about the ground floor of applicants, and everyone else is pretty much screwed. Meaning those not in on the first year of points are looking at decades to even get to the top point pool or else hunting lesser units and/or general areas their whole lives.

Plus, the other thing that many aren't considering is that lots of States are realizing the fallacy of point systems and either have, or are looking for ways, to give first time applicants more of a chance. Point systems change all the time (Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, Arizona, have all changed theirs at least once).

IMO, long term, with the harder to draw tags (moose, sheep, goat, best elk, deer, pronghorn), there will be less people applying. Most hunters can do simple math, and starting to apply for a state like WY for sheep and probably moose, just isn't worth it. The revenue is going to dry up from point sales...just the way it is.

I hope you Idaho guys can maintain your random draw...good luck.

BTW, myself and a few others fought (successfully) the Resident preference point idea here in Wyoming for deer, elk, and pronghorn...hammer your legislature and game and fish, its your wildlife.

 

[----]

As for points...I believe strongly in no points for residents, as for non-residents, I don't see that as a problem, it just gives Idaho more money for those that have no problem dumping all this money into points in different states. The problem is in doing this if Idaho decided to take a certain percentage of the tags and allocate them to non-residents because of this point system they were having them do.

Why doesn't every reason against a point system in this thread apply to nonresidents the same as it does residents?

 

[idahofishnhunt]

Why doesn't every reason against a point system in this thread apply to nonresidents the same as it does residents?

Is that different than what Wyoming and Montana do?

 

[TheDudeAbides]

How about you just look at how terrible draws odds and point creep are for the top hunts in CO, OR and WA...

So, I was curious at what the actual result would be and did the math using a ten point average and distributed the points in a bell curve fashion. I used a twenty year period.

I used a 5 tags for 100 applicants to get the 5%.

For bonus points, 1004 total applications or numbers

Year 1 - 0.5%

Year 2 - 1%

Year 3 - 1.5%

Year 4 - 2.01%

Year 5 - 2.53%

Year 6 - 3.04%

Year 7 - 3.61%

Year 8 - 4.29%

Year 9 - 5.18%

Year 10 - 6.22%

Year 11 - 6.56%

Year 12 - 6.7%

Year 13 - 6.92%

Year 14 - 7.28%

Year 15 - 7.82%

Year 16 - 8.10%

Year 17 - 8.61%

Year 18 - 9.13%

Year 19 - 9.64%

Year 20 - 10.16%

In twenty years the probability that you will draw is 6%, which it would be hard to make the argument that it is any better or any worse than a lottery system. At the highest point you are still 90% unlikely to draw the tag.

Bonus point squared. 9306 total applications or numbers.

Year 1 - 0.05%

Year 2 - 0.11%

Year 3 - 0.27%

Year 4 - 0.54%

Year 5 - 0.92%

Year 6 - 1.41%

Year 7 - 2.03%

Year 8 - 2.82%

Year 9 - 3.90%

Year 10 - 5.35%

Year 11 - 6.48%

Year 12 - 7.43%

Year 13 - 8.45%

Year 14 - 9.66%

Year 15 - 11.30%

Year 16 - 12.44%

Year 17 - 14.20%

Year 18 - 16.08%

Year 19 - 18.09%

Year 20 - 20.24%

Even at the highest point, you still will be 80% unlikely to draw. There is more on an argument for a bonus point squared system than a bonus point system. Though, neither system would be a great argument for a lottery system. The overall probability of drawing a tag in 20 years is 7%.

Summary: There really is not a lot of difference in the 3 systems based on the limited number of tags over a period of time. Increasing the number of tags or reducing the number of applicants will boost the drawing odds in these three systems.

Using the math as my foundation, I think I will change my opinion to either or bonus point squared system or a lottery system is the best system for drawing tags, rather than the bonus point system. Either one is fine by me based upon the math.

Side Note: In states like New Mexico (3 choice lottery) and Nevada (5 choice bonus point squared) your draw probability are still about the same even though you receive more chances each draw.

You mentioned 3 preference point states (Oregon 75/25, Washington 75/25, Colorado modified 100/0). Preference point states are a really tough calculation to make, but using the same scenario as above in a 75/25 you have roughly a 1% chance overall and 4% chance in the max pool every year. Some preference points like Utah also do bonus points, which would be a nightmare to calculate.

Preference point systems work on the notion that there will be enough tags to move people through the top pool, when the demand is high and people get jammed at the top is when they run into problem, because you cannot filter everyone through.

 

[----]

Is that different than what Wyoming and Montana do?

I'm not following you. MT does the same bonus point system for residents and nonresidents, Wyoming is random for residents for DEA, Preference points for resident MSG, and everything's a hybrid preference/random draw for nonresidents.

My point was that if you're arguing that everything should be random and equal, you should also include nonresidents in that, for all the same reasons that have been discussed above.

 

[Steelhead]

Dude...are you now saying that you're fine with a lottery draw system?
Dude...did you just regurgitate that statement that I've made 7 times over the last few weeks on these threads that it would likely only change odds a few percentage points and should we revamp the entire system just to change things "a little bit"?


-This is our concern dude

 

[idahofishnhunt]

I'm not following you. MT does the same bonus point system for residents and nonresidents, Wyoming is random for residents for DEA, Preference points for resident MSG, and everything's a hybrid preference/random draw for nonresidents.

My point was that if you're arguing that everything should be random and equal, you should also include nonresidents in that, for all the same reasons that have been discussed above.

It might be selfish of me with regards to this issue, but I'm really only concerned about the residents of Idaho. If non residents have to adhere to another system to get into drawing in Idaho...then that doesn't bother me. I suppose those that play the points game in all those states, etc. probably aren't happy with me making that statement. The reality is with the game we have here in Idaho, it's cheaper and more economical for me to go buy a second tag then be buying points or an out of state tag. Some like the thrill of hunting other states, and saying they shot something there, or maybe just a change of scenery, etc. That's all well and good if that is your thing, but as a resident of Idaho, that is number 1 priority on my list...not how the non-residents have to fare with drawing in our state.

 

[----]

It might be selfish of me with regards to this issue, but I'm really only concerned about the residents of Idaho. If non residents have to adhere to another system to get into drawing in Idaho...then that doesn't bother me. I suppose those that play the points game in all those states, etc. probably aren't happy with me making that statement. The reality is with the game we have here in Idaho, it's cheaper and more economical for me to go buy a second tag then be buying points or an out of state tag. Some like the thrill of hunting other states, and saying they shot something there, or maybe just a change of scenery, etc. That's all well and good if that is your thing, but as a resident of Idaho, that is number 1 priority on my list...not how the non-residents have to fare with drawing in our state.

Huh, at least you're honest I guess. I wonder how many nonresidents have sent in comments against points because of this thread.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

It might be selfish of me with regards to this issue, but I'm really only concerned about the residents of Idaho. If non residents have to adhere to another system to get into drawing in Idaho...then that doesn't bother me. I suppose those that play the points game in all those states, etc. probably aren't happy with me making that statement. The reality is with the game we have here in Idaho, it's cheaper and more economical for me to go buy a second tag then be buying points or an out of state tag. Some like the thrill of hunting other states, and saying they shot something there, or maybe just a change of scenery, etc. That's all well and good if that is your thing, but as a resident of Idaho, that is number 1 priority on my list...not how the non-residents have to fare with drawing in our state.

I respect your opinion, you made the choice (presumably) to live in a state where you can hunt the species you want locally. I didn't, so if I want to hunt elk (which I do), I am at the mercy of the non-resident systems.

I assume you make this statement taking into account the $$$ non-resident tag fee contribute to your G&F budget.

I don't know what it is, but I would want to know if I were you.

 

[TheTone]

So, I was curious at what the actual result would be and did the math using a ten point average and distributed the points in a bell curve fashion. I used a twenty year period.

I used a 5 tags for 100 applicants to get the 5%.

Just wanting to clarify, but in your scenario you are assuming 5 tags in a hunt with 100 applicants the first year and then no change in who is applying each year? The truth is people bounce around a lot in what they apply for, number of applicants never stays consistent, and in Idaho anyways good luck finding a quality hunt that has 5 tags and only 100 people applying.

 

[TheDudeAbides]

And WY and UT and AZ and...Heck its every state with a point system.

I don't know if that is true.

2 tags for 1000 applicants will be bad no matter the system.

 

[Steelhead]

It might be selfish of me with regards to this issue, but I'm really only concerned about the residents of Idaho. If non residents have to adhere to another system to get into drawing in Idaho...then that doesn't bother me. I suppose those that play the points game in all those states, etc. probably aren't happy with me making that statement. The reality is with the game we have here in Idaho, it's cheaper and more economical for me to go buy a second tag then be buying points or an out of state tag. Some like the thrill of hunting other states, and saying they shot something there, or maybe just a change of scenery, etc. That's all well and good if that is your thing, but as a resident of Idaho, that is number 1 priority on my list...not how the non-residents have to fare with drawing in our state.

Heaven help a man who cares about his state and his resident hunters first. I didn't really see mention of IDFG changing things around only for NRs...did I miss something. The truth of the matter is that I have too many places to hunt as it is so if Idaho wants to implement something whereby they don't get my money for a deer and elk tag every year than so be it, I'll hunt elsewhere until I draw.
Again, I didn't see where NR's were the main issue here...

 

[TheDudeAbides]

Just wanting to clarify, but in your scenario you are assuming 5 tags in a hunt with 100 applicants the first year and then no change in who is applying each year? The truth is people bounce around a lot in what they apply for, number of applicants never stays consistent, and in Idaho anyways good luck finding a quality hunt that has 5 tags and only 100 people applying.

Yeah,

This kind of a vacuum calculation.

How to calculate how many people would join the pool and leave the pool would be difficult. I just calculated the numbers based upon if they were the same all the way through.

When I say that states do a bad job at calculating, this is probably the reason.

Well that and innumeracy.

I think I'll only put in for moose from here on out (in units with high success and good draw odds) and maybe make a few trips up over memorial day or labor day to see if I can help you guys out with the black bears.