Next Draw System to Implode

[rustednuts]

Nevada & Maine. That’s because ground floor applicants face horrendous odds when you consider all the squared and multiplied points of the long invested hunters in front of them. That is ultimately why I think those systems are at the greatest risk to morph. Another issue in Maine is the guide lobby finally getting 20% of NR tags converted to outfitter welfare. That is just a foot in the door as we all know. That cancer will spread.

Maine, needs to do away with the sub permitee or make it so if you are sub you have to wait like you do if you drew the tag. The number of people that put in for their whole family and then essentially take the tag for the themlselves is insane. The bonus point structure in Maine works well.

 

[LostinOregon1]

Sportsman see the draws in how it directly affects them. If your new to the game or have kids you don't want any points, if your invested you want to draw out before any changes. State Wildlife agencies sees the draws only as income. They continually change the game to add more fees and cost associated with drawing without really affecting draw odds.

The trend you will continue to see is the pay to play model by wildlife agencies, especially if you are a non-resident. The latest group think is restriction of non residents to even further levels by the states. I feel that will be the next one to drop on non-residents.

The bottom line is that there are not enough resources for demand and when then happens, costs go up.

It is up to you on how you react to this. If you continue to shoot for the units that make the "lists", you won't be hunting much or not at all. It is totally up to you.

Rich

 

[Zim]

These posted stats really don’t tell you anything at all. For that you’d need to post ground floor applicants over the last several years. The last ten years should show a trend.

 

[Steve O]

I voted Maine as that is one I am NOT in. Please wreck Maine rather than more of the west...

 

[Zim]

South Dakota really has a bad elk system in place considering they CUBE points.... I still can't believe they thought that was a good idea.

Wow ya gotta be crappin me! Cubed points?! Wonder what Einstein came up with that scheme.

 

[Desk Pop]

These posted stats really don’t tell you anything at all. For that you’d need to post ground floor applicants over the last several years. The last ten years should show a trend.

The data I posted shows a steady increase of applicants over the past ten or more years. It is pretty easy to follow because the biggest group had zero points (new applicants), the next largest group had one point, then two points and so on. That is why the numbers got bigger the lower you look...because more people are putting in each subsequent year (I cannot believe I am explaining this.) It is plain as day for anyone who can count and identify which number in a set of numbers is greater or less than other numbers. If the Nevada NR big game draw was a business that sold public stocks, I would be buying the piss out of them.

You are spreading false information to support this ridiculous narrative that Western states, Nevada in particular, are somehow struggling to keep new applicants coming in, which is the exact opposite of what is happening.

You have to be living under a rock to think that Western states are struggling to get new applicants. Applications are exploding.

I love a healthy debate on point systems. But you add nothing but lies and misinformation to the discussion. To say you do or don't like point systems is one thing. But when someone says, "look at these pictures that prove mountain goats are white in color, with long hair" and you say, "I saw the pictures but mountain goats are actually purple, and have scales" no discussion can be had.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The data I posted shows a steady increase of applicants over the past ten or more years. It is pretty easy to follow because the biggest group had zero points (new applicants), the next largest group had one point, then two points and so on. That is why the numbers got bigger the lower you look...because more people are putting in each subsequent year (I cannot believe I am explaining this.) It is plain as day for anyone who can count and identify which number in a set of numbers is greater or less than other numbers. If the Nevada NR big game draw was a business that sold public stocks, I would be buying the piss out of them.

You are spreading false information to support this ridiculous narrative that Western states, Nevada in particular, are somehow struggling to keep new applicants coming in, which is the exact opposite of what is happening.

You have to be living under a rock to think that Western states are struggling to get new applicants. Applications are exploding.

I love a healthy debate on point systems. But you add nothing but lies and misinformation to the discussion. To say you do or don't like point systems is one thing. But when someone says, "look at these pictures that prove mountain goats are white in color, with long hair" and you say, "I saw the pictures but mountain goats are actually purple, and have scales" no discussion can be had.

I think it’s a bit more complicated, CO is obviously doing great on tag sales, but in 2005 there were 240k licenses issued for elk and 219k in 2019.

If you look at just that number you could rightly say CO elk hunter participation has declined in the last 15 years.

 

[vanish]

There are a pile of tags each year on the leftover/reissued lists each year. Going full limited will mean that there are even more. There will be lots of units with quotas for tags that far exceed demand.

The leftover list will be the new OTC and lots of people will still build points and hunt those units. SW CO archery is a great example of this in practice.

I am well aware of that fact, especially as I use it to my advantage already. However, the average hunter is not as savvy. A lot of this is about perception, and the common perception is that you'll no longer be guaranteed "your" tag, regardless of whether reality is different.

 

[Zim]

The data I posted shows a steady increase of applicants over the past ten or more years. It is pretty easy to follow because the biggest group had zero points (new applicants), the next largest group had one point, then two points and so on. That is why the numbers got bigger the lower you look...because more people are putting in each subsequent year (I cannot believe I am explaining this.) It is plain as day for anyone who can count and identify which number in a set of numbers is greater or less than other numbers. If the Nevada NR big game draw was a business that sold public stocks, I would be buying the piss out of them.

You are spreading false information to support this ridiculous narrative that Western states, Nevada in particular, are somehow struggling to keep new applicants coming in, which is the exact opposite of what is happening.

You have to be living under a rock to think that Western states are struggling to get new applicants. Applications are exploding.

I love a healthy debate on point systems. But you add nothing but lies and misinformation to the discussion. To say you do or don't like point systems is one thing. But when someone says, "look at these pictures that prove mountain goats are white in color, with long hair" and you say, "I saw the pictures but mountain goats are actually purple, and have scales" no discussion can be had.

IdahoNick,
With all due respect, you have totally missed the boat. If you read my post this is about ground floor nonresident applicants ONLY. Anything above the zero point level in all your charts is 100% completely irrelevant. In fact, all those numbers are just going to increase one point every year, save the few that disappear due to drawing or dropping out. All have their investments being held hostage so 99% aren't going to drop out. And those numbers cannot escalate more than +1/year because nobody can jump more than one point/year. The only number that matters is the zero. You are not doing any uneducated hunters a service by propagating a false narrative, and encouraging a bad investment decision. Randy has openly stated he doesn't think Utah is a good investment for newbies, and I expect he has the same opinion of Nevada, for the same reason. There are simply far better places to invest your money. BTW - I have never criticized the Nevada system! In fact, as a 22 squared point holder across the board, it greatly benefits me. I've only stated what the facts are about it, in an effort to help newbies make wise investments with their famiiy's money. Those that take the time to do the math understand this.

 

[Zim]

Just wishful thinking on your part. You're hoping it happens somewhere so you can say "I told you so".
You complain about Nevada EVERY year yet you keep applying here.

Major system "changes" have happened in every western state whenever fresh rookie money starts to go untapped. States have no problem throwing long invested hunters under the bus. This is not an opinion, just an undeniable fact. Just look at the latest example, Arizona.

Again, I have never criticized the Nevada system! In fact, as a 22 squared point holder across the board, it greatly benefits me. I've only stated what the facts are about it, in an effort to help newbies make wise investments with their famiiy's money. Those that take the time to do the math understand this. Anybody who has 22 squared points across the board would be brain dead to stop applying there. That's just plain math. So your criticism make zero sense. You know that, so why make such a stupid statement?

 

[Mallardsx2]

Having personally spoken to several LEO's in Colorado I can tell you for free that they are cheerleading for the state to do away with the OTC tags. They all said in the last 10 years things have gotten completely out of hand during the OTC seasons.

One would think that to address the issue in Colorado all they wouldn't need to do is start taking peoples points for ANY tag they acquire in the state. Buck, Doe, Bull, Cow, 1st 2nd 3rd 4th choices and 2nd draw, leftover draw, OTC anything.... If you get a tag for the season you loose your points. If people truly want to hunt there they will have to use their points. Personally, I see nothing wrong with them doing this.

They could even stop the point game entirely right now, go to a random drawing giving people with 5 existing preference points 5X amount of chances in a drawing. Eventually the entire points system points would go away. Odds are that most people with points will draw the tags. But once your points are burned they are gone forever.

But they wont do that because its all about the $$$$$$$$.

 

[BuzzH]

IdahoNick,
With all due respect, you have totally missed the boat. If you read my post this is about ground floor nonresident applicants ONLY. Anything above the zero point level in all your charts is 100% completely irrelevant. In fact, all those numbers are just going to increase one point every year, save the few that disappear due to drawing or dropping out. All have their investments being held hostage so 99% aren't going to drop out. And those numbers cannot escalate more than +1/year because nobody can jump more than one point/year. The only number that matters is the zero. You are not doing any uneducated hunters a service by propagating a false narrative, and encouraging a bad investment decision. Randy has openly stated he doesn't think Utah is a good investment for newbies, and I expect he has the same opinion of Nevada, for the same reason. There are simply far better places to invest your money. BTW - I have never criticized the Nevada system! In fact, as a 22 squared point holder across the board, it greatly benefits me. I've only stated what the facts are about it, in an effort to help newbies make wise investments with their famiiy's money. Those that take the time to do the math understand this.

Good grief...no wonder you whine about preference systems, you don't understand even the basics.

I can assure you, look at the WY NR applications for all species, every year, more and more starting to apply. IdahoNick is 100% correct, every year more and more people enter the points game.

What you cant seem to understand is that in the case of say...Wyoming. If you want to apply for a shot at a random tag here for moose or sheep, you don't have a choice on buying a point. Its with-held automatically. When you look at the moose and sheep reports, and how the applicant tail off after the 1-5 point level, its obvious to me people are applying when they have the money hoping to draw a random tag.

Your problem is, you wrongfully assume everyone entering the points game in the West are only going after the top tier tags like those that entered on or near the ground floor, people like you. That's pure bullchit, most are entering and only looking at low-mid tier tags, but still require points. Again, WY, NV, AZ, lots of tags that you MUST have 1-5 points to draw...these guys aren't dropping out, they're only acquiring enough to draw.

That's also why you see increases every year in what you, again wrongly assume, are ONLY new applicants. Some are, some have drawn and starting over.

But, the only number you really need to look at in regards to all states, is the TOTAL number of applicants, those are increasing in just about every Western State for every species. That's also why your 22 squared points are not increasing your odds of drawing in NV. A whole shit pile of people with 21, 20...all the way to 1 point are devaluing and decreasing your odds over time. Total applicants decrease your odds the most, and is my guess on why you start posts like this, to keep applicants down to increase your odds. Not going to work, as most realize the way you will 100% for sure never draw is only if you choose not to apply. An active application always has a chance.

 

[Trial153]

Is it possible to double implode ? Because Maine already imploded. Allowing unlimted blocks of NR chances was pure silliness, however that something that can be fixed easy. Keep your yearly bonus points and cut out selling extra chance. If they need to gain back that revenue they can just raffle of a tag or two like western states do. Coupled with the newly instated outfitter welfare, Maine is dumpster fire.

 

[Desk Pop]

IdahoNick,
With all due respect, you have totally missed the boat. If you read my post this is about ground floor nonresident applicants ONLY. Anything above the zero point level in all your charts is 100% completely irrelevant. In fact, all those numbers are just going to increase one point every year, save the few that disappear due to drawing or dropping out. All have their investments being held hostage so 99% aren't going to drop out. And those numbers cannot escalate more than +1/year because nobody can jump more than one point/year. The only number that matters is the zero. You are not doing any uneducated hunters a service by propagating a false narrative, and encouraging a bad investment decision. Randy has openly stated he doesn't think Utah is a good investment for newbies, and I expect he has the same opinion of Nevada, for the same reason. There are simply far better places to invest your money. BTW - I have never criticized the Nevada system! In fact, as a 22 squared point holder across the board, it greatly benefits me. I've only stated what the facts are about it, in an effort to help newbies make wise investments with their famiiy's money. Those that take the time to do the math understand this.

I asked which states were showing a decrease in new NR applicants. You said Nevada. I showed you that the largest group of applicants in 2019 were brand new applicants with zero points.

You said no, new applicants are decreasing. Then you said 99% of people stay in until they draw which seems to me to show that when you look at point holders and the largest number is zero, new applicants are the largest group each year. The numbers above zero are relevant because they are all SMALLER then the number of ground floor applicants.

I would disagree that you have never criticized the Nevada system. Your entire arguement is that it is so crappy it will self implode.

I couldn't care less whether and where others apply to. I know that they will not draw if they do not apply. And I know that Nevada NR new applicants were the biggest single group of applicants in 2019, so their system is working fine for them securing new hunters.

 

[Tradewind]

Does this mean I should stop buying points? Or maybe buy twice as many figuring they will be worth abt half when i try to use them?

 

[Desk Pop]

I think it’s a bit more complicated, CO is obviously doing great on tag sales, but in 2005 there were 240k licenses issued for elk and 219k in 2019.

If you look at just that number you could rightly say CO elk hunter participation has declined in the last 15 years.

I see what you are saying, but I was being specific to Nevada and seeing why Zim thought there were less ground floor NR draw applicants when clearly they were the largest group of applicants in 2019.

Colorado is a little more nuanced, as you mentioned. I think using just tag numbers to determine if new draw applicants are increasing with a state that has so many OTC tags makes thing murkier when having a discussion specifically on draw systems....also because at least a portion of those are limited areas, quotas increase and decrease over time.

2020 had a lot of new applicants in CO. I have only studied the NR S/G/M numbers there and know that the past 3 years showed a huge increase, with some species gaining close to double the applicants over the past 3 years than the previous 20 before that. It shows apps are increasing despite point systems, but CO is a tough nut in the conversation because they have made changes and accessibility to draw easier in the past couple of years....it is sort of an experiment with way more than one variable.

Point systems may go away. There are legitimate arguments on both sides. But I do not predict Nevada will change a system that more and more new people apply to every year, with seemingly little attrition over time as they work through the system. From the money making perspective, NV is working.

If a system implodes, I think you will see fewer and fewer new applicants over a period of 5-10 years before they decide to do anything.

At that point states will do a cost/benefit analysis and determine if pissing off everyone with points and potentially driving a portion away is worth the possibility of gaining new people.

 

[Labman]

Why didn’t CA make the cut?

 

[targetpanic]

Is it possible to double implode ? Because Maine already imploded. Allowing unlimted blocks of NR chances was pure silliness, however that something that can be fixed easy. Keep your yearly bonus points and cut out selling extra chance. If they need to gain back that revenue they can just raffle of a tag or two like western states do. Coupled with the newly instated outfitter welfare, Maine is dumpster fire.

I had no problem with Maine allowing you to buy 1,3,6 or 10 chances...when they went to unlimited blocks of 10 that was ridiculous. I believe that happened at the same time that they started weighting the bonus points in 5-year increments. Don't get me started on the "Lodge Tags"

 

[Tradewind]

An old friend told me abt 10 yrs ago that hunting was becoming a rich man's sport.
Increasingly, he seems correct.

 

[Zim]

Good grief...no wonder you whine about preference systems, you don't understand even the basics.

I can assure you, look at the WY NR applications for all species, every year, more and more starting to apply. IdahoNick is 100% correct, every year more and more people enter the points game.

What you cant seem to understand is that in the case of say...Wyoming. If you want to apply for a shot at a random tag here for moose or sheep, you don't have a choice on buying a point. Its with-held automatically. When you look at the moose and sheep reports, and how the applicant tail off after the 1-5 point level, its obvious to me people are applying when they have the money hoping to draw a random tag.

Your problem is, you wrongfully assume everyone entering the points game in the West are only going after the top tier tags like those that entered on or near the ground floor, people like you. That's pure bullchit, most are entering and only looking at low-mid tier tags, but still require points. Again, WY, NV, AZ, lots of tags that you MUST have 1-5 points to draw...these guys aren't dropping out, they're only acquiring enough to draw.

That's also why you see increases every year in what you, again wrongly assume, are ONLY new applicants. Some are, some have drawn and starting over.

But, the only number you really need to look at in regards to all states, is the TOTAL number of applicants, those are increasing in just about every Western State for every species. That's also why your 22 squared points are not increasing your odds of drawing in NV. A whole shit pile of people with 21, 20...all the way to 1 point are devaluing and decreasing your odds over time. Total applicants decrease your odds the most, and is my guess on why you start posts like this, to keep applicants down to increase your odds. Not going to work, as most realize the way you will 100% for sure never draw is only if you choose not to apply. An active application always has a chance.

Wyoming???

I have not said a word about Wyoming in this entire thread! What the hell are you whining about???

In fact at this point in time Wyoming gets my vote for the #1 nonresident friendly state to apply and hunt in, at least for elk & antelope.