2rocky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2010
- Messages
- 5,147
Would you rather they go to an "alternate list" like most other states do? It's not as bad as it could be...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Except 90/10 isn't the allocation.They're keeping tags at the 90/10 allocation like it's supposed to be.
What is it then?Except 90/10 isn't the allocation.
"Tag holders may choose to transfer their tag to a qualified, non-profit organization who would facilitate the tag being awarded to another individual represented by the organization and who meets specific criteria for participation in the tag transfer program. (AB 89/CGR 501)"I wish returned tags were first offered to the Wounded Warrior, Handicapped Hunter, and Youth programs before relisting the tags for FCFS residents and FCFS nonresidents. Happy hunting, TheGrayRider.
As a former Nevada resident where every single big game tag is a limited entry and there are no guaranteed draws, it's a bit tough to get tags already. I'm primarily an archery guy who has 5 page excel spreadsheets for my draw odds and plan. But by turning in tags, if you do happen to draw overlapping tags it at least gives you an option.I hate the turn back in for any reason. I'm ok with death, medical or military.
If you applied for it, and don't have a medical, death or military excuse, hunt it. No scouting then turning it in. If you have a conflict, consider that before applying for overlapping hunts.
Sometimes a unit is just not up to par with the points. I’ve never done it but may dad has after hunting with me for two weeks he turned back his black powder tag.I hate the turn back in for any reason. I'm ok with death, medical or military.
If you applied for it, and don't have a medical, death or military excuse, hunt it. No scouting then turning it in. If you have a conflict, consider that before applying for overlapping hunts.
"Tag holders may choose to transfer their tag to a qualified, non-profit organization who would facilitate the tag being awarded to another individual represented by the organization and who meets specific criteria for participation in the tag transfer program. (AB 89/CGR 501)"
New for this year.
Donate to an organization, lose your points and go in to any waiting period
Or, turn it back in, get all points back, get point for current year.
I wonder which folks will choose?
Bull chit point protection is already inherent in the Nevada process. But you want them to use an AZ process instead and charge separately for it?Hopefully, Nevada and Utah will eventually have a Point Guard and Point Guard Plus program much like Arizona.
Or even better get rid of points.Hopefully, Nevada and Utah will eventually have a Point Guard and Point Guard Plus program much like Arizona.
If you bought Point Guard in Arizona and then donate your tag to a charitable organization then you get your points back and no waiting period.
For what it’s worth, Arizona seems ahead of several other Western states regarding tag donations and support of and to charitable entities. Good for them. Happy hunting, TheGrayRider.
In reality no unit is truly up to par with the points if that is what metric is used.Sometimes a unit is just not up to par with the points. I’ve never done it but may dad has after hunting with me for two weeks he turned back his black powder tag.
In reality no unit is truly up to par with the points if that is what metric is used.
Is a 170 buck worth 10 points?
180?
190?
150?
What about 15, or 5 points?
How is that metric measured?
That mentality is what is actually taking away from hunting, what anti hunters don't understand, and what is actually driving the point creep up.
Apply for a tag. If you draw hunt. Find the best animal you can and be happy. Or eat the tag.
If a person is so far into the point game, and there is concern over a specific size animal being worth the number of points it takes to draw, then why even apply for the hunt in the first place?
If someone takes a turned in tag, and kills that 150 buck you passed up before turning in the tag, it accomplished nothing, and the deer that could have put on 20 inches over the next year is now in someone else's freezer. If a person just eats a tag, the animal still has a potential to grow larger for next year and make that hunter, or another hunter happy.
And the person who turned in the tag now has one more point expecting more out of a hunt at couldn't be found the year before with fewer points, with the tag not being worth it then.
So now we have this vicious cycle, and doing the same thing expecting different results.
This is put perfectly for Nevada. In a Preference Point system you could justify (a little more at least) the statement of a hunt or units “being worth X amount of points”. Not at all in a bonus point system such as Nevada’s. Look thru the bonus point data for Nevada, from year to year, and you’ll see tags drawn at different point levels. A hunt will have 5 tags available and point holders from 0-20 applying. Many times you’ll see all 5 tags drawn by the 0-5 bonus point holders. It’s all over the map year in/out.In reality no unit is truly up to par with the points if that is what metric is used.
Is a 170 buck worth 10 points?
180?
190?
150?
What about 15, or 5 points?
How is that metric measured?
That mentality is what is actually taking away from hunting, what anti hunters don't understand, and what is actually driving the point creep up.
Apply for a tag. If you draw hunt. Find the best animal you can and be happy. Or eat the tag.
If a person is so far into the point game, and there is concern over a specific size animal being worth the number of points it takes to draw, then why even apply for the hunt in the first place?
If someone takes a turned in tag, and kills that 150 buck you passed up before turning in the tag, it accomplished nothing, and the deer that could have put on 20 inches over the next year is now in someone else's freezer. If a person just eats a tag, the animal still has a potential to grow larger for next year and make that hunter, or another hunter happy.
And the person who turned in the tag now has one more point expecting more out of a hunt at couldn't be found the year before with fewer points, with the tag not being worth it then.
So now we have this vicious cycle, and doing the same thing expecting different results.
Well Nevada has officially lost any future money from me.
In 2022 I was extremely fortunate to draw a Ruby's archery deer tag in the second draw.
I also picked up a FCFS unit 051 early rifle antlered elk tag, sept 17-30 (Resident only).
And a FCFS unit 033 horns long than ears pronghorn tag.
All as a non resident.
I am already on 7 year wait for elk and 3 year wait for pronghorn.
There is no point for me to waste money on points after the waiting period, that would take an eternity to draw a tag. I'd rather just wait until i'm older to purchase Landowner tags, probably not much difference in cost either after waiting 30-40 years to draw.