Quick thoughts on non resident random draw

[MooseCaboose]

We will need to start applying game theory to selecting hunting areas. Wait did i just invent a new website?

 

[Trial153]

I dont think you can ignore the effects of the cost increases. With each unsuccessful application becoming more costly people are less likely to pay and pray when it was cheaper.

 

[Nathan]

I say blame Randy.

He keeps talking about how he would rather cash in often and hunt more than sit on the couch collecting points. Then add in the fact he constantly talks about how good antelope meat is and how much fun they are to hunt. I know I'm blaming him because I never considered hunting antelope until listening to him and here I am headed to Wyoming in October for my first ever antelope hunt.

I don't know much about the GoHunt stuff. I chose my three units based 100% off the Wyoming website and it was pretty confusing. Even after I thought I had it figured out I was still second guessing myself on if I truely understood what I was reading in the numbers. For now since I am taking the Randy approach and hunting tougher hunts with easier draw odds I don't see a benefit to GoHunt but in a few years when points start playing a role I can see the site being beneficial.

 

[Big Fin]

I would expect this trend to continue. Look at some of the states and where the big bubble is in point totals. Lots of hunters in many states, for many species, approaching 10+ points. Some started with the false idea that points were a sure way to a "glory tag." They (points) are part of the process toward a good tag, but not a guarantee. Now, they are realizing that the further down the point path they travel, the glory tag options stay just as far away due to point creep or fewer tags being issued or changes in draw systems, etc..

End result, a lot of folks have tired of accumulating points and are burning points. The real question becomes whether or not they will jump back in.

I'm a perfect example. After I burn my UT antelope points next year, there is a really good chance I will walk away from Utah and leave my accumulated sheep and moose points on the table. Just can't justify the cost for the minuscule odds that come with applying there. I am fresh off the deer/elk wait list and I am realistic in what it will take for me to ever draw again.

In Wyoming, I burned all my deer points this year. From now on, I see nothing but Region-wide tags in my future for Wyoming. No interest in waiting decades more for a tag like I have this year.

How long it will take for the folks with above average point totals to burn through those points and exit the systems, who knows. Who knows what percentage will exit the system and what percentage will jump back in.

We tend to focus on the short-term idea of fighting over an ever shrinking pool of tags. If Wyoming had the number of pronghorn it had in the heyday, a lot more residents and non-residents would be getting pronghorn tags this year. By fighting over a shrinking pool, we are adopting the "scarcity" mindset.

If we collectively focused on increasing the number of animals on the mountain, we would increase our collective draw odds by a significant amount. I look at how few ram tags MT issues compared to what we were issuing in the late 1990s. Disease issues reducing tags by 40% makes everyone's odds a lot worse, especially when we have increased interest.

Look at the mule deer herds of western Wyoming. Those numbers are way down below what they were twenty years ago. Some say it is winters or predators. The baselines, even after recovery, are coming lower and lower each decade. Long-term trends like that are not winter or predators. It is policy and land use.

Will hunters buck the trends of greater society and adopt the "abundance" mindset that allows for a bigger pie or will we be more like the rest of society and lean to the "scarcity" mindset?

All the point systems, schemes, and research will not solve these shrinking draw odds if the number of animals that allows for allocated tags continues a long-term decline. There are many on this site who do a metric ton of work, with their time/talent/treasure, to increase herd numbers. I cannot thank them enough. If not for their advocacy, we would have even lower draw odds and far less opportunity. Those abundance thinkers and the fruits of their efforts are a huge help to combatting the problems expressed in lower draw odds.

 

[MTGomer]

^ seems to make more sense than fighting over who gets to kill the last one.
Unfortunately many ‘hunters’ don’t see it that way.

 

[Irrelevant]

I'm hoping a good recession will bring the # of NR hunters back down (and housing prices).

 

[antelopedundee]

I say blame Randy.

He keeps talking about how he would rather cash in often and hunt more than sit on the couch collecting points. Then add in the fact he constantly talks about how good antelope meat is and how much fun they are to hunt. I know I'm blaming him because I never considered hunting antelope until listening to him and here I am headed to Wyoming in October for my first ever antelope hunt.

I don't know much about the GoHunt stuff. I chose my three units based 100% off the Wyoming website and it was pretty confusing. Even after I thought I had it figured out I was still second guessing myself on if I truely understood what I was reading in the numbers. For now since I am taking the Randy approach and hunting tougher hunts with easier draw odds I don't see a benefit to GoHunt but in a few years when points start playing a role I can see the site being beneficial.

You also want to look at the resident draws for an area too because if the residents don't draw their 80% allocation then those tags get rolled into the non-resident pool.

 

[Jqarm]

It may not have been widespread, but not every unit experienced creep. I saw that the unit I drew in the NR Special draw with 1 point last year (and only 19% odds as it turned out), could have been drawn as a 3rd choice in the NR Special random draw this year. Plus there are leftover doe tags in this unit this year (there were zero lefotver last year, if I recall correctly).

Granted, it's no trophy unit and has little to no accessible BLM land for camping (though plenty of state land). But still, I had a great hunt and saw many, many antelope during my scouting and hunting. It would be a good unit for an every-year or second choice hunt to keep the freezer full.

 

[utahminer]

Wow, you're right! Who's the poor sap who blew thirteen preference points to draw that tag in Unit 25? Bueller? Bueller?

I'd be surprised if he wasnt splitting with friends. I'm in that same space. I'm tired of the Wyoming points game and willing to take a lower tier tag and go with my brother than waiting years to maybe pull a better tag.

 

[BrentD]

We will need to start applying game theory to selecting hunting areas. Wait did i just invent a new website?

Absolutely!

Bone up on your Nash Equilibrium Theory, Ideal Free Distributions, and ESS.

This cannot be good for the future of hunting.

 

[PrairieHunter]

One issue is Wyoming is one of the cheapest NR tags in the west in the $300 range. Montana, Kansas, etc are $500 + for deer tags. I think Colorado is even $400.

Wyoming simply needs to adjust NR tag pricing to market levels like surrounding states have except Nebraska who is also due for a NR increase but the hunt quality is not there to support the increase.

Wyoming deer and antelope tags should be in the $500 range.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

So I'm seeing a lot of people posting disappointment about not getting tags that they thought were more or less guaranteed. So I thought I might open a discussion about what the draw odds are telling us. I’m not specifically talking about point-creep (which is a real thing and well-documented on this site and requires much more math than I care to do). But in my quick glancing at the non-resident any antelope random draw (which is something I assume most newcomers to this page are following), I see a couple of interesting things.

(So for those new readers, this is the draw that doesn’t pay attention to points and just places all non-resident applicants on equal footing—so many first time Wyoming antelope hunters look at these numbers because they can be used to try to predict what your odds of drawing a tag are if you have no points and are a non-resident—though as you’ll see, the predictive power is waning.)

First, it seems like people are actually paying attention to (and playing) the odds game. If you look at the numbers, the areas that experienced the largest percentage increase in applicants tend to be the areas that were easier to draw last year. So for example, Unit 11 last year had 41 tags for 84 first-choice applicants, or roughly a 49% draw success rate. That’s a high rate. This year, Unit 11 had 42 tags for a whopping 173 first-choice applicants, or a 24% success rate. Take Unit 25. Last year, a 100% success rate, with 106 tags for 86 first-choice applicants. This year, it actually had more tags to allocate (129), but a success rate of just 79% because of the 163 (roughly double last year’s) applicants. Outside of Unit 102 (I can’t even begin to guess what happened there), Unit 26 might be the most stark example. Last year, it had 262 tags for only 93 first-choice applicants—in fact, the total applicant pool (1st, 2nd, and 3rd) for that Unit was only 319 against 262 tags—so more than 80% of the people applying for a tag in that unit, regardless of preference, could have gotten one. This year, similar number of tags (243), but 235 first choice applicants. So still a 100% success rate for first-choicers, but then almost 0% for anyone else.

Second observation is that some of the biggest jumps occurred for the somehow-special tags (the #2 tags, which denote a later season, within half-mile of irrigated land, etc). Look at Unit 46. The Type 2 tag (later season start) last year was about a 54% draw—32 tags against 59 applicants. This year, an unreal drop to 13% at 24 tags against 181 applicants. Unit 77-2 is a good example, too—33% draw odds last year, 3% this year. There’s really no good reason to apply for those tags unless you’re playing the odds, which it seems like substantially more people did this year.

Final observation is, it looks like preferences shifted in ways that are not all bad news for those of us who oftentimes apply without any accumulated points. That is, every unit did not get harder to draw, and in fact, some were substantially easier. Unit 9, for example, which had a 39% success rate last year for first-choice applicants went up to 47%. Unit 43 went from 23% to 35%. There are 6 or 7 units based on my quick look that fit this pattern—a meaningful increase in the chances of drawing with no points.

Would love to hear peoples’ thoughts. My take away is, as more information gets out there (this site, etc), people are doing a better job of predicting their odds and maybe changing their application habits . But because of that, it will open up some opportunities in units that have historically been difficult to draw, as people begin to realize their long-shot odds. The real downside, though, is that we non-residents are rapidly running out of any “safe draw” units with no points. I’ll guess that for a few more years, you’ll be able to guarantee yourself a tag with no points for a “special” (i.e. twice the price) license, but that soon, the days of non-resident hunters being able to guarantee themselves a tag without points will be gone.

All the data services out there have made determining odds much easier than 3-4 years ago. Gohunt in particular has made it so stupid simple that there are no secrets anymore. Combine that with every hunting celeb under the sun pimping one or more of these services and the result is access to information is easier to obtain than it ever has been. All these services market themselves as a way to gain information few other people have, but the truth is if everyone has it, its not a secret. This all reminds me of when Huntin Fool first became popular. When it started as a small newsletter with maybe a few hundred subscribers, yes it was a good resource and your gained insights the unwashed masses did not necessarily have. Soon enough though as it gained popularity, turned into a magazine, then a website, and gained wide circulation, it became a list to check so you knew what units NOT to put in for. You could avoid all the lemmings by looking at what Huntin Fool and Eastmans listed, it was a great game to play.

Now there are so many people trying to make money off hunting, there are so many services, everything is disclosed in simple to understand terms, the days of doing your own research and dodging the masses by spending time learning about draw systems, point levels, applicants, etc are over. People are paying services to do that research so everyone is pretty much on a level playing field now. The guy that spends $150 on GoHunt and browses the data for a couple hours is level with the guy who spends weeks reviewing raw draw data, for past and present, calls fish and game, speaks to past hunters etc.

Bottom line, when everyone is swimming in the same information, is the information really worth anything anymore? Year to year draws will become less easy to predict as there are knee jerk reactions to units odds from last year Things will become more random, people will try to guess which units are going up because last year they appeared easy to draw and which units will level out because last year there was a spike in applications.

The root cause of all of this is a shrinking resource and spiking demand. The people who tell you hunting is dying are liars. Look at the numbers, look at the orange in the mountains. Its more popular than ever.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

All the hubbub around draws makes me want to pay even less attention than I already do to odds, just apply for places that I really want to experience, and properly do justice to whatever tags I get. I am not old, but even I can remember when a little extra data mining could help you snap up an OK tag that was overlooked. Not anymore, and that's ok, things change.

 

[bts09]

All the hubbub around draws makes me want to pay even less attention than I already do to odds, just apply for places that I really want to experience, and properly do justice to whatever tags I get. I am not old, but even I can remember when a little extra data mining could help you snap up an OK tag that was overlooked. Not anymore, and that's ok, things change.

I feel like there's a lot of wisdom here. Especially if you're in the situation of already having had a hunt or two out west and gotten those memories.

 

[bullbugle307]

You can't discount another part of the equation, there are way less pronghorn to hunt in general and in areas that used to absorb a lot of the hunting pressure. So hunters are shifting to other areas that you could get on a second or even third choice that now aren't even a guarantee for first choice. There are a number of reasons for this including natural cycles, development, reduced landowner tolerance, and GF balancing their budgets on the backs of the animals (which is partly the legislature and GF commissions fault for fighting license fee increases to such a ridiculous degree).

When I was a kid, a lot of people hunted areas like 47 that used to have like 3-4 thousand tags between any antelope and doe tags. Now that area has less than a thousand tags between any antelope and doe fawn. That dynamic has shifted a ton of hunters to what used to be easy to draw to areas. The same thing has happened with deer. I really hope something changes and people decide that continually declining pronghorn and deer hunters aren't acceptable. Maybe the new leadership at GF will help, but I doubt it.

Another problem is that hunts aren't targeted to where they need to be. GF will justify a bunch of doe tags in an area because they have a depradation problem with one or two small but vocal landowners. But rather than having those tags targeted to where the "problem" is (often times the problem is landowner tolerance and how they manage hunting on their property), you get a bunch more hunters piss pounding what few critters can be found on public.

I try and buy all the doe fawn tags I can for deer and pronghorn every year and purposefully not fill them. I'm buying lives. But it doesn't really work. GF looks at lower hunter success and factors that in to how many tags they allocate. They don't care if hunter success drops, they'll sell more tags to kill the same number of pronghorn and make more money, which is a win for them.

I know all this makes me sound like a bitter crazy ahole, but i'm tired of having less deer and pronghorn, harder to draw tags, and a bunch of people that just act like this is the way it is and new thinking isn't needed.

This is all coming from a Resident perspective, but it directly affects the NR side in tag allocation and odds. No doubt NR hunters are much smarter nowadays with OnX and GoHunt as others have said too.

 

[Bigjav]

Check out the NR PP Regular Draw. In many 0 point units people dropped 7-13 points.

It’s going to take years for that unit to come back down... IF it ever does

 

[HONEYBADGER]

It’s going to take years for that unit to come back down... IF it ever does

It aint never coming down. A few years ago there was a decent unit west of Casper that could be had with 1-2 points in the speciial. You could hunt it every other year guaranteed. A few years back one of the major mags pimped it in their top 5 and it exploded. It has come down ever so slightly over the last 5 years but nowhere near what it was.

 

[MooseCaboose]

I joke about game theory but the reality is that draw odds are actually a complete function of other hunter’s preferences. It seems to me many forget services like GoHunt offer a backward looking view of draw odds and applicants reactions’ to said odds must be accounted for in making current year hunt area decisions.

 

[mtnprst]

Mountain Pursuit did some research into the "goHunt Effect" focused on Arizona Mule Deer OTC Tags and all the attention given to them by website movies, blogs, podcasts, etc.

We define the "goHunt Effect" not only by the availability of tag strategy websites like gohunt, but also tag application strategies distributed in blogs, articles, podcasts, and forums like hunttalk.com, etc. The "goHunt Effect" also includes marketing, articles, hunting movies, and all media which bring attention to a specific hunt area, species or tag. We found 30+ articles, blogs, movies, podcasts, etc. highlighting the nonresident Arizona OTC deer tags.

From 2014-2018 Arizona Resident OTC Dec/Jan deer tag sales increased 39.8%.

Non-Resident OTC Arizona deer tag sales increased 143%.

Click HERE for the full article.

 

[WapitiBob]

And on the flip side, I can point out an elk area that has been mentioned as “guys top 5” twice, was featured in a YouTube hunt episode, and that area increased a whopping 1 nr application.