Point Creep realistic topping out number

[Duck-Slayer]

There is no topping out number really, when a top point holder dies, another top point holder takes his place…
Matt

 

[bullbugle307]

In a very sad way, you are absolutely correct. In today's society, it unfortunately takes a lot of money for conservation and its a direct result of us humans and what we do to the landscape.

If the human race was wiped out in all of North america, I'm pretty sure that mother earth would crack a beer and smile knowing she can get back to where she was 500 years ago.

We're never going back to where we were 500 years ago. Think of cheatgrass alone. The cats outta the bag on that one.

 

[BenInMT]

Why do we ”need” to recruit more hunters? You need more social media followers? Do you work for a manufacturer of hunting related items? I see no logic in these arguments that we constantly need to be out there running a recruitment campaign making sure that we are upping our numbers. All we are going to do is push this great socialist experiment to a breaking point.

 

[bullbugle307]

You ever notice that practically everyone involved in R3 is financially tied to the hunting industry. Not a coincidence.

 

[seeth07]

Why do we ”need” to recruit more hunters? You need more social media followers? Do you work for a manufacturer of hunting related items? I see no logic in these arguments that we constantly need to be out there running a recruitment campaign making sure that we are upping our numbers. All we are going to do is push this great socialist experiment to a breaking point.

You ever notice that practically everyone involved in R3 is financially tied to the hunting industry. Not a coincidence.

While certainly the marketing and money making part has its merit, the idea process behind why recruitment is so important is because without future hunters, there is no future hunting. This is because we are already a small voice in our nation and across the entire United States, numbers are indeed falling. This means our voice in things like politics gets smaller and smaller.

 

[seeth07]

We're never going back to where we were 500 years ago. Think of cheatgrass alone. The cats outta the bag on that one.

So it may not return exactly back to perfect but she will indeed be happier. All you have to do is look at Chernobyl, crazy stuff how fast she can take back over an area deserted by humans.

 

[bullbugle307]

While certainly the marketing and money making part has its merit, the idea process behind why recruitment is so important is because without future hunters, there is no future hunting. This is because we are already a small voice in our nation and across the entire United States, numbers are indeed falling. This means our voice in things like politics gets smaller and smaller.

It's true. And it ain't like I don't mentor new hunters, I've taken two out this year alone.

But I've gotta wonder what the proportion of people who are primarily worried about the future of hunting and conservation is vs. the proportion of people who are worried primarily about their pocketbook and all the things that come with that. If there are no hunters, there is no hunting industry. Period.

Put another way, would the push for R3 have been as robust as it was if it was strictly about the future of hunting and conservation and if people weren't thinking about their wallets. No way. It's easy to do the right thing when there's money to be made.

But we're straying from the topic at this point. Sorry for that.

 

[bullbugle307]

Damnit, I'm gonna add one more point, then I'm done. It would be interesting to see the companies that showed up for R3 but didn't have a damn thing to say about public land transfer.

 

[Bullshot]

There is no topping out number really, when a top point holder dies, another top point holder takes his place…
Matt

Exactly. When there is a huge, aging, pointholder pool AND very very scarce (and diminishing) tags, the avg age will go up over time. Eventually ONLY the outlier age class (healthy 80,90 yr olds) would draw. Only way to solve it is blow up the system, more animals on the mountain, or several things which would qualify as truly awful (think four horsemen).

 

[ccc23454]

Buying points at age of 12 hoping to cash them in by outliving everyone around you when your sheep hunting at 91 sounds like a logical system...

 

[Trial153]

So it may not return exactly back to perfect but she will indeed be happier. All you have to do is look at Chernobyl, crazy stuff how fast she can take back over an area deserted by humans.

Did you really have mention the unit buy name. My spot is ruined now. Thanks

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz I go to task force web page... find this a whole presentation on sheep preference points, aging out etc.

What to I find... oh, they model age 65 as the max age.

Come on there guy...

Who's model, that dude from LCCC?

The same guy that "modeled" the "best" system of points to be squared bonus points?

Laffin'...

He needs to understand the demographics...and how long people will actually apply.

 

[ImBillT]

What is the aggregate, mean age of all .01% tag holders across every western state. Moose, Sheep, Goat, Elk, Mule deer etc. Do you really thinks it’s over the average life expectancy of white men in the US which is 75.1?

Because that was my point, you are arguing a straw man. I’m sure a 93 year old has killed a sheep… probably a 12 year old as well, outliers.

A) Dead people aren’t drawing tags, but THEY ARE impacting life expectancy.

B) Point systems skew distribution toward those in the system the longest.

Theoretically I think it might be more likely for the average age of certain groups of tag holders to exceed the life expectancy that one might naturally assume. Just another reason that point systems will eventually implode or experience significant change.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

A) Dead people aren’t drawing tags, but THEY ARE impacting life expectancy.

B) Point systems skew distribution toward those in the system the longest.

Theoretically I think it might be more likely for the average age of certain groups of tag holders to exceed the life expectancy. Just another reason that point systems will eventually implode or experience significant change.

Explain that? I really have a hard time with a pref point max above 50.

Some bonus point holders at 65pts totally. But the top pool…

 

[seeth07]

Explain that? I really have a hard time with a pref point max above 50.

Some bonus point holders at 65pts totally. But the top pool…

Above 30 or even 20 is already silly. Waiting 30 years and saving up pref to go and draw an elk tag is a broken system. So don't sell it short at 50 being tolerable

 

[QuazyQuinton]

Above 30 or even 20 is already silly. Waiting 30 years and saving up pref to go and draw an elk tag is a broken system. So don't sell it short at 50 being tolerable

I can't help but respond, though, that perhaps it's the person who.chooses to wait 30+ years that's broken. They are not choosing the best value.

This coming from me who presently has 20 points for elk in Oregon. It has happened, and I will follow through with one of the big bull units in NE Oregon, but there's no way it's the best long-term value.

QQ

 

[seeth07]

I can't help but respond, though, that perhaps it's the person who.chooses to wait 30+ years that's broken. They are not choosing the best value.

This coming from me who presently has 20 points for elk in Oregon. It has happened, and I will follow through with one of the big bull units in NE Oregon, but there's no way it's the best long-term value.

QQ

I couldn't agree more. No hunt on this planet is truly worth 30 years of point investment.

Where it gets a little broken and a little more justifiable to wait that long is in a state like CO where you can just save for that supposed great hunt with those points and than just get an otc tag. I really wish every state in the west required non residents to use their points for any tag they buy...level that playing field a bit more

 

[Blackcats06]

I couldn't agree more. No hunt on this planet is truly worth 30 years of point investment.

Where it gets a little broken and a little more justifiable to wait that long is in a state like CO where you can just save for that supposed great hunt with those points and than just get an otc tag. I really wish every state in the west required non residents to use their points for any tag they buy...level that playing field a bit more

Non-residents and residents should loose their points when getting any tag. This is mainly in Colorado for elk

I say that even though I believe in Arizona you should only lose your points for your first or second choice. There are left over tags that a person could draw on a third choice but they are not worth losing points over. Not having left overs reduces the man power gf needs to issue the tags.

 

[seeth07]

Non-residents and residents should loose their points when getting any tag. This is mainly in Colorado for elk

I say that even though I believe in Arizona you should only lose your points for your first or second choice. There are left over tags that a person could draw on a third choice but they are not worth losing points over. Not having left overs reduces the man power gf needs to issue the tags.

I'm ok with it being different for residents just simply because you may want to hunt deer on your farm every year but dream of a mountain deer hunt.

As for Arizona, no I mean all tags. No matter the choice, no matter what it is. Residents can get the leftovers than afterwards or whoever you want to go about it. I'm all for removing the strategies of how you can go hunt now but save your points for something better.

 

[LopeHunter]

While certainly the marketing and money making part has its merit, the idea process behind why recruitment is so important is because without future hunters, there is no future hunting. This is because we are already a small voice in our nation and across the entire United States, numbers are indeed falling. This means our voice in things like politics gets smaller and smaller.

Ask the former leg-hold fur trappers in Colorado how not recruiting more trappers worked out for them. Was awesome for opportunity until one election trapping opportunity was voted to be zero.