A Way to Repair Broken Points Systems?

[ImBillT]

Preference points just become bonus points.

And stop being sold, so once they’re gone everything has become random.

 

[ImBillT]

Dude, this is just the same stuff regurgitated over and over. It's like the million "what's the best caliber" threads.

Here's a solution: Triple tag fees across the board. Every state. Every tag. There you go. Just fixed it. The guys who TRULY want to do it will make it happen.

You could say that already about private land tags. If you TRULY want to do it, just go buy a NM or UT tag.

I prefer not to price people out of a public resource. Leave the prices 5X-10X what a resident pays.

 

[gallagher71]

You could say that already about private land tags. If you TRULY want to do it, just go buy a NM or UT tag.

I prefer not to price people out of a public resource. Leave the prices 5X-10X what a resident pays.

Or guide tags where instead of paying a trespass fee, a hunter has to pay the licensed outfitter?

Again, states get to do what they want. Today, several don't get any revenue from me because there's no meaningful path to use them.

As my kids, seven of them aged 12 to 3, transition into becoming hunters (at least those who wish to do so), the state misses revenue for them too.

Whether we like it or not, the trustees of the wildlife trust have a duty to the beneficiaries, the residents. The only benefit us non-residents really have to offer is revenue.

Personally, I'd buy more points if there was a long term but meaningful path to use them.

 

[Hawk Tuah]

Too complicated.

Just eliminate the purchase of any new points and make 50%-90% of the tags random. If you don’t apply, you lose your points. In other words, to maintain your points, you must attempt to draw a tag. The same percentage of people get tags every year regardless of point scheme, but if you stop selling points, then current point holders lose no advantage they do not currently have, but eventually new entrants will be at no disadvantage compared to anyone else.

Are you missing something? One of is. I was thinking that last time I checked it would take over 120yrs to get each current point holder in UT one elk tag. How did you come to 6.7?

In your idea NR with points would now get only 10% of 10% NR allocation of the tags which is 1% ... So the NRs who built points for 30 years now compete with each other for 1% of a state's tags while the rest go random. Sounds fair.

 

[Zim]

In your idea NR with points would now get only 10% of 10% NR allocation of the tags which is 1% ... So the NRs who built points for 30 years now compete with each other for 1% of a state's tags while the rest go random. Sounds fair.

Finally a solution to these threads?

What I don’t get is why all these noobs ignore my suggestion of going the legislative route to rescind all the ridiculous outfitter welfare tags. That would rightfully return a massive amount of a public resource to the taxpayers. I never got a single reply to that. They think I’m joking? Because I most definitely was not.

 

[gallagher71]

In your idea NR with points would now get only 10% of 10% NR allocation of the tags which is 1% ... So the NRs who built points for 30 years now compete with each other for 1% of a state's tags while the rest go random. Sounds fair.

Tag allocation doesn't change in the idea I proposed.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I want something simple. Like

Ok guys here’s the actual solution, you want a tag you go in person to the DOW and play Russian roulette. 5 rounds loaded guy who doesn’t die gets a tag.

 

[Lyfter1013]

Ok guys here’s actual solution, you want a tag you go in person to the DOW and play Russian roulette. 5 rounds loaded guy who doesn’t die gets a tag.

Well that’s one way to get rid of the high point holders

 

[Hawk Tuah]

Tag allocation doesn't change in the idea I proposed.

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to ImBillT who I quoted in my response. His idea was to keep points for point holders but do away with anyone getting new points. He would give up to 90% of tags randomly, however, but to appease NR guys with max points or alot of points he would graciously allow them a whopping 1% of total state tags to be drawn based on points (10% of the 10%).

That's a silly idea. That's what I responded to.

 

[Trial153]

Ok guys here’s the actual solution, you want a tag you go in person to the DOW and play Russian roulette. 5 rounds loaded guy who doesn’t die gets a tag.

So your saying I have a chance? Sign me up!

 

[44hunter45]

We could declare pyramid schemes illegal in all 50 states, especially when run by governments.

As part of the settlement they would have to grant tags to the gullible saps who gave them money expecting a return.

Post settlement. random draw only. If you received a settlement tag, you are OILed out of future hunts.

 

[BlakeA]

It's like the million "what's the best caliber" threads.

This ^^^^ It's gets so fricken old.

Everyone knows the best caliber is clearly the 6.5 Creedmoor. So let's stop making new threads.

 

[BlakeA]

Between this crap and the "Destroy All Non Residents" thread by @BenInMT thread we are in some desperate need of some draw results. Can we get some successfuls/unsuccessfuls and "I don't want your honey holes but would take a peek at them if you don't mind and will never log back in or respond" threads coming again please? Looking at you AZ...

 

[8andcounting]

Between this crap and the "Destroy All Non Residents" thread by @BenInMT thread we are in some desperate need of some draw results. Can we get some successfuls/unsuccessfuls and "I don't want your honey holes but would take a peek at them if you don't mind and will never log back in or respond" threads coming again please? Looking at you AZ...

Hey I need something to sit back and laugh at I just paid $1312 to apply in montana lol

 

[ImBillT]

They’re not limited to 1%, because they still get the same shot in the random just like everyone else if they don’t draw in the point pool.

I’ll tell you what is better though. Convert all preference points to bonus, and stop issuing new points. Don’t apply, and your points go away.

 

[ImBillT]

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to ImBillT who I quoted in my response. His idea was to keep points for point holders but do away with anyone getting new points. He would give up to 90% of tags randomly, however, but to appease NR guys with max points or alot of points he would graciously allow them a whopping 1% of total state tags to be drawn based on points (10% of the 10%).

That's a silly idea. That's what I responded to.

Let’s ditch their preference all the way. Convert them to bonus points, sell no new points, and if someone doesn’t apply for a year they loose their points. No place holder. Put yourself to the hazard of drawing or loose your points. If you draw, and cancel tough luck.

MT doesn’t have much right in their draw system, but they do have one thing right. You can’t just keep buying points for a general tag without applying. Of course a random system fixes that problem before it even starts.

 

[ImBillT]

Or guide tags where instead of paying a trespass fee, a hunter has to pay the licensed outfitter?

Again, states get to do what they want. Today, several don't get any revenue from me because there's no meaningful path to use them.

As my kids, seven of them aged 12 to 3, transition into becoming hunters (at least those who wish to do so), the state misses revenue for them too.

Whether we like it or not, the trustees of the wildlife trust have a duty to the beneficiaries, the residents. The only benefit us non-residents really have to offer is revenue.

Personally, I'd buy more points if there was a long term but meaningful path to use them.

I think you missed my point. My point was simply that I do not subscribe to the idea that we should simply raise the price of tags enough to price out a significant portion of applicants thus improving draw odds. I don’t think that is the right way to distribute a public resource.

It is funny that I have seen a couple people on this forum who absolutely despise landowner tags, auction tags, raffle tags, etc. be the very people advocating for the raising prices enough to reduce the number of applicants. They want their money to buy them a tag that you cannot, but they don’t want to buy that tag from a landowner.

 

[TheJason]

Hey I need something to sit back and laugh at I just paid $1312 to apply in montana lol

That’s worth a laugh.

 

[bullbugle307]

I would agree with most of your post, but I for one don't think point systems suck. I love the fact that I can reasonably predict what tags I get. I will gladly pay for points, and even accumulate more than I need, in order to plan my hunting calendar.

That and the fact that you don't have to worry about whether the random draw is really a random draw.

 

[Deleted member 38069]

Another World War will straighten the system.