Ideas on Point Collecting/Point Creep

[Big Fin]

I've been outlining this video for a couple years. I started out with over ten ideas, then I decided to cut it to just a handful. I talked about most of these in Post #26 of this thread - https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/what-to-do-with-8-wyoming-elk-points.317196/post-3526305

Anyhow, some food for thought. Not saying they would work, or if they would ever be accepted by "point collectors." And like I said on that other thread, if some of these passed, they might make a moot point of my idea of "No more buying points; you must apply for a hunt code."

Michael just posted it, so I will be interested to see if it raises the shit storm the last video created. Interested in ideas others have, or, is there even any interest in the things that contribute to "point collecting," which is a part of the complaint many have about point creep.

 

[Addicting]

I agree with the exception of using points for discounted cow/doe/fawn tags. Those are population control tags and shouldn’t inhibit someone from using their points on a bull tag.

 

[seeth07]

I agree with the exception of using points for discounted cow/doe/fawn tags. Those are population control tags and shouldn’t inhibit someone from using their points on a bull tag.

No. That's how point hogs happen. If your priority is to fill the freezer, you have to burn points. It is what it is when resources are limited. Leftovers after a draw then don't require points

 

[Sagebrush1]

Yah. I feel like ripping the proverbial band-aid off now and accepting that a few years of personal pain will result in a better future for us all is the best move.

The current system is untenable if you looking at it in terms of “will it ever get better in my lifetime.” Im thinking mostly of my son when I ponder hunting’s future, and I want a better system for his generation, and the others to come.

 

[WildWill]

Yah. I feel like ripping the proverbial band-aid off now and accepting that a few years of personal pain will result in a better future for us all is the best move.

The current system is untenable if you looking at it in terms of “will it ever get better in my lifetime.” Im thinking mostly of my son when I ponder hunting’s future, and I want a better system for his generation, and the others to come.

Very well said couldn't agree more!

 

[Bullshot]

I think it would be interesting if after a certain time, points became like many other assets that depreciate annually. Say 5% upon 10 yrs and then 1% more each year thereafter. So the value of buying vs using acts like a resistor, the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to wait. Ultimately it becomes USE IT OR LOSE IT. Probably would preserve the money making ponzi scheme AND solve point creep at the same time.

You’re Welcome!

 

[RickND69]

If Wyoming is gonna do a major overhaul with price and tag allocations then why don't they do a 90/10 split on allocation and set the tag price to the current special preference point price and no preference points just be a random luck of the draw tag for everyone. To make up the difference for the point money revenue make us non residents purchase a non refundable hunting and fishing license for the year you are applying. I know it's not that great for planning year to year but I would weed out the point collectors. My opinion only.

 

[Scott85]

I just watched this video early. My response is right on!

 

[LopeHunter]

F&G are high on their own supply of tag fees. Common sense is not a feasible outcome. No fee is ever cut for a non-resident whether it be application fee, hunting license, bonus point, preferred point, license, tag, habitat, conservation or any of the other fees to apply and hunt in a state.

The hurdles for a non-resident to hunt never are lowered. The state owns the wildlife and sees it as a pimp sees his ladies. Go out there and make me some money. And, resident costs lag inflation, non-resident costs exceed inflation and non-resident allocation falls in relation to resident.

The end result is the non-resident game is no longer realistic for Joe Six-Pack. Does not hurt my ability to hunt big game out of state but makes me sad to think of the young version of me that would have no shot (pun) at this rich person's hobby just as I then could not own a polo pony nor join the country club. I was on the other side of the fence looking in.

My support of conservation organizations would likely have been much less under that scenario. Maybe my voting would shift to be less supportive of something I would see as not my hobby. Definitely would own less weapons so 2nd Amendment less critical to my activities.

Was a good ride for me. God speed to the youth looking to travel beyond the state line to hunt.

 

[Zim]

I think it would be interesting if after a certain time, points became like many other assets that depreciate annually. Say 5% upon 10 yrs and then 1% more each year thereafter. So the value of buying vs using acts like a resistor, the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to wait. Ultimately it becomes USE IT OR LOSE IT. Probably would preserve the money making ponzi scheme AND solve point creep at the same time.

You’re Welcome!

My points have already suffered major depreciation well in excess of 1% or 5% annually without any more help. That thanks to state schemes like outfitter welfare, lower NR quotas, and multitudes of other program changes. Trying to burn them ASAP but I’m not one of those lucky ones. Despite 40 apps in eight states, I’ve not drawn a single tag in any random-based lottery in ten years (2012), only preference based systems. Most my picks are longshots, but odds for at least two of my units is 30% every year. Just horrible luck.

One thing many forget is us guys with high point totals are not necessarily point savers by choice everywhere. I got 22+ points in Nevada & Utah but I list the worst units in those states and still can’t draw because the NR quotas have been watered down so bad by auction & welfare tags over the years.

 

[bennirio]

Make points transferable. I have purchased them right? Why can't I sell them or if I can't sell them put them in my trust to pass down to my children when I die. The later is more likely to happen with the current point creep. I can see these things being argued in the future too. Just food for thought. Like Randy hinted to it's a Ponzi scheme. My favorite option was no more point buying. You need to apply for a hunt. This separates the hunters from the "point investors". Topped with strict rules for returning a tag it just might help. Thanks for great content on Freshtrack+. I might need to check out YouTube just for the comments on these videos.

 

[seeth07]

Make points transferable. I have purchased them right? Why can't I sell them or if I can't sell them put them in my trust to pass down to my children when I die. The later is more likely to happen with the current point creep. I can see these things being argued in the future too. Just food for thought. Like Randy hinted to it's a Ponzi scheme. My favorite option was no more point buying. You need to apply for a hunt. This separates the hunters from the "point investors". Topped with strict rules for returning a tag it just might help. Thanks for great content on Freshtrack+. I might need to check out YouTube just for the comments on these videos.

Although unpopular with most here, I have recommended this before as the solution to point creep - selling points.

My logic has always been that if you have to apply to gain a point with tough return tag policies, you weed out those just buying a point to sell it. You can also achieve the same thing by setting a maximum limit to what you can sell those points for to another person (just make it same value as what was paid or current point price).

What I feel would happen would be absolute complete chaos the first 2 years. Crazy stuff like an epic elk tag taking 100s of points as wealthy people buy up all those that want to sell and just get out. It's going to drastically reduce the point pool, especially at the high point holder level.

This would not work for species with low tag totals, like sheep tags. The wealthy would always be able to buy enough points to get their tag.

 

[seeth07]

Although unpopular with most here, I have recommended this before as the solution to point creep-selling points.

My logic has always been that if you have to apply to gain a point with tough return tag policies, you weed out those just buying a point to sell it. You can also achieve the same thing by setting a maximum limit to what you can sell those points for to another person (just make it same value as what was paid or current point price).

What I feel would happen would be absolute complete chaos the first 2 years. Crazy stuff like an epic elk tag taking 100s of points as wealthy people buy up all those that want to sell and just get out. It's going to drastically reduce the point pool, especially at the high point holder level.

This would not work for species with low tag totals, like sheep tags. The wealthy would always be able to buy enough points to get their tag.

Wait, bonus thought.

Make it worth it for state to make money in the process. And make it more fair. Here we go.

You can sell as many points as you have. One, some or all. You sell them to THE STATE. There is a deadline to do this by. State buys them back at current point price. Then, points drop for purchase at double the cost. Restriction. You can only buy one point, first come, first serve. Or dare I say....Idaho queue system?

 

[Speeddmn]

I am sure my boat is this eace is very empty. I buy OTC stuff here in Montana. I get my archery lope tag and usually put in for moose, lope doe, deer b and apply for 380 elk. Out of state isnt in the cards for me, just dont feel it.

Personally Id love to see a system that would allow the point owner to apply x# of points toward this tag and x# to that tag. Might allow someone with say 15 points get into 2 decent tags vs waiting forever to maybe get 1.

 

[seeth07]

I am sure my boat is this eace is very empty. I buy OTC stuff here in Montana. I get my archery lope tag and usually put in for moose, lope doe, deer b and apply for 380 elk. Out of state isnt in the cards for me, just dont feel it.

Personally Id love to see a system that would allow the point owner to apply x# of points toward this tag and x# to that tag. Might allow someone with say 15 points get into 2 decent tags vs waiting forever to maybe get 1.

As Randy mentioned, the states aren't going to drop their cash cow and although I think many would support the idea of just have a singular preference point that you must apply to whatever you want to draw, states make more money by selling a point for each species.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Make points transferable. I have purchased them right? Why can't I sell them or if I can't sell them put them in my trust to pass down to my children when I die. The later is more likely to happen with the current point creep. I can see these things being argued in the future too. Just food for thought. Like Randy hinted to it's a Ponzi scheme. My favorite option was no more point buying. You need to apply for a hunt. This separates the hunters from the "point investors". Topped with strict rules for returning a tag it just might help. Thanks for great content on Freshtrack+. I might need to check out YouTube just for the comments on these videos.

Oh great, so a ton of people will just buy a point every year at $50 to sell it on the point market for a markup $100, and a Gen WY elk tag will take 50points to draw.

 

[BuzzH]

One consistent thing in these discussions are the stupid ideas to "fix" the problems.

Only things I agree with are losing points for any antlered or either sex tag you obtain for a species and no point averaging.

Makes no sense to force people to apply for a hunt. I would rather let people just buy a point than compete with them in the draw.

Selling points or making them transferable is the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

 

[338win]

As much as I hate Georgia, they have a decent point system. You pick how many points you want to wager from how many you have accumulated. I would love that system so I could wager a few points each year in type 2/3/4 tags and hunt a decent unit every year for the “lesser” tags And let the point hoarders hold out for a glory tag.

 

[seeth07]

Selling points or making them transferable is the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

Rather than just insult the concept with that comment, I truly would love to hear your thoughts on exactly why its a bad idea

 

[Deleted member 28227]

One consistent thing in these discussions are the stupid ideas to "fix" the problems.

If we look at the entire problem, all the states and all the schemes since inception seems pretty clear that the issue has always been:

1. Individual greed, how does the benefit me rather than make a fair system.
2. Total disregard for economics/human behavior.

I do think that if you made folks apply for a hunt, that you completely eliminated refunds (yes even for death), and that every tag zero'd your points that we'd have a lot less folks participating.