Point Riding and "Gaming Applications"

[ShootsManyBullets]

Who was that guy on here that was always offering to "help" people in Wyoming in return for sharing points?
Every year someone would post I have 10 points (or something like that) and not sure where to go. Concerned HT guy would make a couple posts then slide into the DMs with an offer to get him into a good area, etc.

 

[JLS]

Who was that guy on here that was always offering to "help" people in Wyoming in return for sharing points?
Every year someone would post I have 10 points (or something like that) and not sure where to go. Concerned HT guy would make a couple posts then slide into the DMs with an offer to get him into a good area, etc.

jims

 

[jt13]

Who was that guy on here that was always offering to "help" people in Wyoming in return for sharing points?
Every year someone would post I have 10 points (or something like that) and not sure where to go. Concerned HT guy would make a couple posts then slide into the DMs with an offer to get him into a good area, etc.

I have much less issue with this than the AZ Point Guard scam. At least they're going on the hunt not using the points to get the tags then getting the points back

 

[WapitiBob]

Doesn't bother me.

 

[SC Living Outdoors]

You could easily remedy this by just getting rid of point guard. If you draw the tag you get the tag. If you don't want it don't apply for it. Up the application fee by $5 so you don't lose any money.

 

[ImBillT]

You could easily remedy this by just getting rid of point guard. If you draw the tag you get the tag. If you don't want it don't apply for it. Up the application fee by $5 so you don't lose any money.

And leave room for legitimate medical issues like WY.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Utah had to revise their rules around party applications since averaging worked for applying then the "fake hunters" turned in their tags to get points back. Rinse and repeat. Easy fix: All party members keep their tag upon drawing or all forfeit tags.

I think taking either this or the CO route are good solutions but both result in AZ getting less $.

 

[rmyoung1]

One perk about Arizona's Point Guard program: It allows the tagholder to donate the tag to a youth with a life-threatening illness without "starting over" in the point game. I had the opportunity to do this in 2019. The recipient was a 14-year-old boy who teamed up with Arizona Hunt of a Lifetime. He got a bull and called me after his hunt. It was a pretty neat thing to be a part of. I'd recommend it to anyone who had the means and desire to give a little back to the hunting community. @BuzzH pointed me to the program, and I’m happy I was able to contribute in a small way.

 

[thebestusernamesaretaken]

This topic came up on the Arizona draw thread and I think it makes sense to have a separate conversation on the matter so as not to take away from all of those discussing the lack of AZGFD charges to their credit cards.

I recently listened to a conversation regarding the "application strategy" of "pointing riding." For those of you that have not heard of this, it is a method of taking advantage of systems such as Arizona's "Point Guard" to permit you to apply for units that would otherwise be out of reach. A variation of this concept is as follows:

A Hunter is married with two children. For simplicity sake, lets assume neither Hunter's wife nor his children hunt. Every year during hunting season, Hunter applies for elk in Arizona for he, his wife and his children (perhaps points only for the wife and kids). After 15 years of applying, Hunter draws the tag he has been waiting for. The following year, he resets to 1-2 preference points but will now submit his application as a party application with his wife--thus enabling him to draw units requiring 8-9 preference points (Hunter's 2 points + wife's 16 points = average 9 points). He and his wife draw a late season rife unit and, because his wife doesn't hunt and has paid for Point Guard, returns her tag. Her points are restored and her husband, Hunter, enjoys the hunt himself.

The following year Hunter repeats this process but now applies with his son as a party application (Hunter 2 points, son 17 points). Again, using point guard, the son can return his tag and restore his points and Hunter enjoys another 9 point hunt. The following year he can do the same thing with his daughter's application and apply for hunts as though he has 10 points. Further, because Hunter's family members have taken advantage of Point Guard, he can now go apply again in years 4, 5, and 6 using the same methodology only this time, his family member can't return the tag.

The above description may be a bit off but that is my understanding of how this concept works. In effect, by "riding on the points of others" and returning tags, Hunter can hunt in Arizona 7 consecutive years as though he had near double digit points each year.

I go back and forth on how I view "gaming" or "taking advantage of" the system in this manner. Part of me views this as unethical and a "loophole" that should be closed by, at a minimum, requiring all party applicants to return tags if one member of a party returns their tag via Point Guard.

However, I will be the first to admit that when it comes to other complex regulatory structures, I too take full advantage of the rules to my benefit so long as it is legal (I'm thinking of the tax code here and the various legal methods used to defer or shield yourself from additional taxes).

I'm curious to hear thoughts of others. How rampant do you think this is? At the very least, this becomes economically burdensome for the out-of-state applicants. Are there other questionable methods you're aware of that you think merit discussion?

Would we be better off if I deleted this thread all together so as not to bring any more attention to this "application strategy"?

The whole preference point system is a game to begin with, that truly only benefits those early adopters who signed up the very first and perhaps second year that the system was introduced. It's branded as loyalty program but the system was designed to provide more (unfair), chances to those folks who were alerted to the system first (insider knowledge).

I don't believe that there is a single State wildlife hunting preference point system that would be considered legal in that State if it were considered a true lottery system. Raffle ticket sales have more restrictions than the wildlife preference point systems. Further, the rules on resident / non-resident tag availability would be against every states law if it were any other application. Used Car Dealers are held to a higher standard in every single Western State as compared to our wildlife hunting agency tag allocation systems.

If it's not a random drawl, the system is corrupt already and given this, it's going to be prone to further abuses. As the given rules change, new schemes will be developed and taken advantage of. The only way to address this once and for all would be to make the system honest to begin with.

 

[thebestusernamesaretaken]

And leave room for legitimate medical issues like WY.

I've never used it but, I like the Idea of Point Guard. I believe that you can only use it once? Man, stuff in life comes up with work, money or family and it can't be controlled. Why penalize a hunter. We don't need to ponce on a person when they are down. Think of customer satisfaction here. How much more likely is a hunter with a limited budget going to pick a State that gives a mulligan, over one that doesn't. Sure, I suppose that it could also be considered by some as misused for other things that don't meet our MORAL criterial such as drought our wild fires in the area. However, it still would hold the same appeal to the whole, if we just stop judging the reasons why.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Lot of people use "relative/friend points" to get further ahead in Wyoming. Thats a fact.

Their relative has no interest in hunting but they have points just to help other people get into units yearly.

I heard of one guy who was paying for points for 8 of his friends and relatives tags yearly for this exact purpose. He would then buy his two relatives tags and his own so he could ensure he was hunting.

By the time he had made it to the end of the list his relatives had built up enough points on the front end again to continue hunting the same unit.

Quite disturbing.

I wish they would put an end to the point averaging and make it the lowest point holder # of points going into the draw for good.

 

[WapitiBob]

The whole preference point system is a game to begin with, that truly only benefits those early adopters who signed up the very first and perhaps second year that the system was introduced. It's branded as loyalty program but the system was designed to provide more (unfair), chances to those folks who were alerted to the system first (insider knowledge).

I don't believe that there is a single State wildlife hunting preference point system that would be considered legal in that State if it were considered a true lottery system. Raffle ticket sales have more restrictions than the wildlife preference point systems. Further, the rules on resident / non-resident tag availability would be against every states law if it were any other application. Used Car Dealers are held to a higher standard in every single Western State as compared to our wildlife hunting agency tag allocation systems.

If it's not a random drawl, the system is corrupt already and given this, it's going to be prone to further abuses. As the given rules change, new schemes will be developed and taken advantage of. The only way to address this once and for all would be to make the system honest to begin with.

Always amusing to read these.

 

[thebestusernamesaretaken]

Always amusing to read these.

I guess it was a long winded way of saying don't blame the player, blame the game

 

[FeartheTurtle]

Easy solution. Make it like Colorado. If a party application is submitted, don't average the points, rather the party gets assigned the point level that is equal to the lowest point holder in the party.

End of discussion. Problem solved. I'd be all on board with that, though I've helped some and benefited some from the point averaging that most states currently all

Easy solution. Make it like Colorado. If a party application is submitted, don't average the points, rather the party gets assigned the point level that is equal to the lowest point holder in the party.

End of discussion. Problem solved. I'd be all on board with that, though I've helped some and benefited some from the point averaging that most states currently allow.

I get that some people game the system, and that's too bad, but there are a lot of hunters out there who could be hurt by the 'lowest in the group' policy. I've taken younger kids on several really fun hunts in Wyoming and Utah, that they would not have been able to draw themselves. We were able to average points with my older kids and me putting in a group app with the younger ones. We can't (OK - won't) do that in Colorado because after building points for a few years the higher point people would just be throwing away those extra points. We have also had to say no to a few friends, new to hunting, who wanted to hunt Colorado with us but couldn't because they had never applied and had zero points. Granted, our group hunts have been for deer and goat in the two to four point range, not the big time 10 - 15 point trophy hunts, but it stinks when a friend or family member misses out on a hunt they could have drawn with point averaging.

 

[JakeInVegas]

Easy solution. Make it like Colorado. If a party application is submitted, don't average the points, rather the party gets assigned the point level that is equal to the lowest point holder in the party.

End of discussion. Problem solved. I'd be all on board with that, though I've helped some and benefited some from the point averaging that most states currently allow.

I agree with this approach. This is a problem in Nevada as well with mule deer tags. You can pay for Aunt Sally to get a license and enter the draw every year and then average your points. After doing this for fifteen years you are pretty much guaranteed a mule deer tag every year. Never mind the fact that the last time Aunt Sally picked up a firearm or firearm replica was when you paid her to take Hunter's safety fifteen years ago. In Nevada you can return the tag every year, no questions asked, and then jump back in with full points the following year. I have emailed NDOW and Kalkomey regarding this issue and neither entity found it worth their time to reply.

 

[JAG]

Don't forget about AZ's permanent bonus point for those taking their Hunter Safety Course and another permanent loyalty point for applying after five years. This state just keeps looking better.

 

[FlatlanderAZ]

Don't forget about AZ's permanent bonus point for those taking their Hunter Safety Course and another permanent loyalty point for applying after five years. This state just keeps looking better.

AZ’s loyalty point isn’t exactly permanent. If you fail to apply for 5 consecutive years it is lost.

 

[Jdan9]

You lose the loyalty point if you miss one year of applying In AZ.

 

[Buffs35]

Easy solution. Make it like Colorado. If a party application is submitted, don't average the points, rather the party gets assigned the point level that is equal to the lowest point holder in the party.

End of discussion. Problem solved. I'd be all on board with that, though I've helped some and benefited some from the point averaging that most states currently allow.

The only thing Colorado gets correct.