BuzzH
Well-known member
I disagree, Wyoming doesn't manage the entire state for opportunity, nor does UT manage the entire state for trophy potential.
I think you need to study up on how Wyoming actually manages, because you're way out in the weeds.
UT bonus point, worth the purchase?
- Thread starter Cheaha
- Start date
I disagree, Wyoming doesn't manage the entire state for opportunity, nor does UT manage the entire state for trophy potential.
I think you need to study up on how Wyoming actually manages, because you're way out in the weeds.
Zim
Well-known member
There's no way I'd suggest anyone get in Utah's corrupt system on the ground floor. You are funding corruption and a $261K/year consultant tax plus a whole lot more. Most LE primo tags in the United States skimmed right off the top from the get go. That is what you are buying into. The end result of that is preposterously low LE odds for even the mid & low tier units. Terrible return-on-investment compared to every other state with trophy game.
TheDudeAbides
Well-known member
I agree that a unit by unit comparison the management practices would be different, but I was speaking in generalities. There are a whole slough of things that go into generating tags(Landowner complaints, crowding, etc). Let's just look at elk.
Utah does it's limited entry program for elk by age class of animals. The number of permits are set by the data collected by harvest and observation. Utah does have opportunity for elk 30,000 rifle any bull /spike permits and a slough of antlerless permits. You can hunt elk every year in Utah, but it is such a low success hunt that it isn't even mentioned in Randy's article about "How to hunt elk every year" article.
Wyoming is managed by Big game herds being counted and classified to sex and age annually using a combination of aerial and ground observations. I do believe the if Utah managed the same elk herd the hunts in the Wyoming Range and Medicine Bow would be limited entry affairs with more cow tags available. I guess the point is that Utah is more about the antlers than Wyoming is. There are hunts and units that are managed for big animals like the late season migratory hunts near Cody.
Wyoming gets antlers by managing for hunter opportunity and Utah gets antlers by managing for limited hunter opportunity. Both systems work for getting bigger animals, because of the population and terrain.
If someone had to choose to apply to either Utah or Wyoming, I would say that Wyoming is the better bet - but if you can muster the money, I would apply for both.
It doesn't mean that people should not apply in Both.
BuzzH
Well-known member
You're still not correct on how WY manages for elk.
There are 2 basic designations, trophy management and opportunity.
In designated trophy elk areas, bull-to-cow ratios have to be 40/100 or better. Opportunity management is somewhere between 18-23 bull per 100 cows (all post harvest).
In trophy management areas, if btc ratios drop below 40/100. type 1/2 tags are reduced the following year. If btc ratios in opportunity areas drop below 18, either spikes are excluded from harvest and/or the season length is reduced.
Just because an elk tag is Limited Quota, does not mean its being managed under trophy designation. Many LQ areas are managed for opportunity, the exact same as most general areas.
General hunting opportunities for elk in Wyoming are not "low success hunts"...and lots of big bulls are killed annually in WY's general areas.
There are also LQ areas under trophy management that aren't necessarily high success hunts either.
Wyoming has a much more broad range of management, is very proactive in maintaining quality even in general areas, and IMO, provides way more diversity in elk opportunities than Utah. But, Wyomings management is not just based on managing for high elk numbers, to imply it is would be wrong.
There are 2 basic designations, trophy management and opportunity.
In designated trophy elk areas, bull-to-cow ratios have to be 40/100 or better. Opportunity management is somewhere between 18-23 bull per 100 cows (all post harvest).
In trophy management areas, if btc ratios drop below 40/100. type 1/2 tags are reduced the following year. If btc ratios in opportunity areas drop below 18, either spikes are excluded from harvest and/or the season length is reduced.
Just because an elk tag is Limited Quota, does not mean its being managed under trophy designation. Many LQ areas are managed for opportunity, the exact same as most general areas.
General hunting opportunities for elk in Wyoming are not "low success hunts"...and lots of big bulls are killed annually in WY's general areas.
There are also LQ areas under trophy management that aren't necessarily high success hunts either.
Wyoming has a much more broad range of management, is very proactive in maintaining quality even in general areas, and IMO, provides way more diversity in elk opportunities than Utah. But, Wyomings management is not just based on managing for high elk numbers, to imply it is would be wrong.
You won't draw without putting in, that's a given. I would suggest you start building points in UT and applying when you can, IF that money is not going to keep you from going on other hunts. That's my take. I apply for as much as I can in as many places as I can, but not at the expense of other trips. This year I cut back on applications in a few state's as I drew a tag that depleted by app funds.
Zim
Well-known member
Your money is much, much better invested in many other states than this corrupt one. So if you are first invested in all those places and can afford to piss stupid money away, do Utah from the ground floor. But passing on them certainly won't prevent you from drawing a good tag elsewhere, including Canada or Alaska. If you do the math you will see what I'm talking about as far as ROI. I don't apply in Idaho but statistically your odds of drawing a premium tag there are exponentially higher for the money invested, when compared to Utah. Even if you don't accumulate a point it does not matter. Take the time to do the math and you will see. Want sheep odds for elk tags? Do Utah. Point systems are overvalued.
Last edited:
I agree with this. Point creep is getting bad in all states. The money I spend between four states with points and two others without, I might as well just spend that money on a drop camp or a land owner tag every couple years.
WapitiBob
Well-known member
It costs $42.50 to apply in Utah when you average the license over two years. The only state that's cheaper is NM, when you opt for their refund. And Utah is a Bonus Point state.
Zim
Well-known member
You need to do ALL of the math, not just a part of it. Divide NR tags by the number of guys that would be in front of you if starting from ground floor zero. Can't judge waits based on todays point requirements because since they allowed NR's to apply for all species ~7 years ago, applications boomed and those in line for even a mid tier elk tag. For a newbie it would likely take 30 points just to get something like the Book Cliffs. That is the sad reality. And it's really not realistic to count on a random tag with sheep odds for elk tags 1/1,000 really, for an elk??? So what that means is eventually Utah will screw the point holders and morph their pref/random split like AZ just did to likely 50/50 or even 25/75 to attract fresh money. And all this is IF SFW doesn't further raid the LE tags to convert to more wealth tags which you know they will eventually push for. Because 500 tags will never enough for them. How else to get that consultant fee up from only $261,000/year???
So the result of all this is bonus points in Utah are some of the most worthless in all the United States. Only thing worse is Oregon, and Colorado once past 5 points. Those have virtually no value at all. Far fewer people apply to Idaho because they don't have a point system, So the perception is the applicant doesn't get anything out of it if they don't draw. But what are points worth if they are watered down to virtually nothing??? Odds to draw in Idaho are far, far greater than Utah. Short term or long term. Once again, please take the time to crunch ALL the numbers and you will clearly see. Don't blindly follow the apply, apply, apply preachers, nor the SFW lemmings.
So the result of all this is bonus points in Utah are some of the most worthless in all the United States. Only thing worse is Oregon, and Colorado once past 5 points. Those have virtually no value at all. Far fewer people apply to Idaho because they don't have a point system, So the perception is the applicant doesn't get anything out of it if they don't draw. But what are points worth if they are watered down to virtually nothing??? Odds to draw in Idaho are far, far greater than Utah. Short term or long term. Once again, please take the time to crunch ALL the numbers and you will clearly see. Don't blindly follow the apply, apply, apply preachers, nor the SFW lemmings.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Zim,
I think you need to consider other things than just draw odds.
For example, if a person wants to hunt bighorn sheep, moose, goats in the lower 48, for many hunters buying those tags/hunts are not an option. Desert sheep hunts for 50K, Shiras moose for 15K, etc.
So, if a person wants ANY chance of drawing those types of tags, the only way to do it is to blanket the West with applications. If you're already going to do that (apply for OIL species), you might just as well apply for points for all species as the investment is pretty small. Plus, even though you're continually a glass half empty guy, things could change to favor those with points in the future just as easily (increased populations, fewer people applying, etc.).
Your theory makes some sense if a hunter is only applying for deer, elk, and pronghorn, but makes little to no sense if hunters are already buying an expensive NR hunting license to apply for MSGB. At that point, all you're investing is the point fees for the more common species.
I do agree with you that investing JUST in deer, elk, and pronghorn points doesn't make as much sense. There are lots of options to hunt those species annually without accumulating points at all.
I think you need to consider other things than just draw odds.
For example, if a person wants to hunt bighorn sheep, moose, goats in the lower 48, for many hunters buying those tags/hunts are not an option. Desert sheep hunts for 50K, Shiras moose for 15K, etc.
So, if a person wants ANY chance of drawing those types of tags, the only way to do it is to blanket the West with applications. If you're already going to do that (apply for OIL species), you might just as well apply for points for all species as the investment is pretty small. Plus, even though you're continually a glass half empty guy, things could change to favor those with points in the future just as easily (increased populations, fewer people applying, etc.).
Your theory makes some sense if a hunter is only applying for deer, elk, and pronghorn, but makes little to no sense if hunters are already buying an expensive NR hunting license to apply for MSGB. At that point, all you're investing is the point fees for the more common species.
I do agree with you that investing JUST in deer, elk, and pronghorn points doesn't make as much sense. There are lots of options to hunt those species annually without accumulating points at all.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Zim, please cash in all your points on some quality doe or cow hunts and quit yer sniveling.
BuzzH
Well-known member
^^^This, the sniveling part^^^^
Carnage2011
Well-known member
I've yet to see a post from Zim without a snivel.....we may not hear from him again if he actually draws a tag.
Flatland Crusoe
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2014
- Messages
- 572
Grandpa, please tell me the story of the time when you could get in on the ground floor of a points system, possibly have max points, or go hunt limited entry elk without 2 decades of points.
I think anyone getting into the points game/western draw mess today has to really view things differently than someone who has been playing for 20 years when the system was at least in theory functioning closer to its base goal without just ripping off everyone who didn't get in on the ground floor of a draw. I don't think any of the draws in the west have really hit maturity where they have stabilized at a level where you know how many points today it will take to draw x tag starting from zero. Quantitatively I would love to see what state by state the rate of new point buyers, people dropping out and people getting tags. Its definitely excel that I wouldn't mind starting to track out of curiosity. I'd also like to see the median and mean points for limited entry tags state by state year over year.
I think you have to prioritize the spectrum of states by value, availability of tags and add states in a logical order starting with states like Wyoming/Colorado and ending with Oregon/NV/UT as places where points will net you a return at least in a numeric sense. While you are building points you need to apply like mad to New Mexico and Idaho because until you have many years in PP/Bonus point states they are you best odds while filling in your vacation days with OTC/Leftover tags.
To answer you question simply, I wouldn't buy Utah bonus points until I had gotten Wyoming, Colorado, Montana and Arizona first with apps in to New Mexico and Idaho. I don't like a lot of things coming out of Utah politically and I don't feel like donating to their cause for something I might see in the future.
I think anyone getting into the points game/western draw mess today has to really view things differently than someone who has been playing for 20 years when the system was at least in theory functioning closer to its base goal without just ripping off everyone who didn't get in on the ground floor of a draw. I don't think any of the draws in the west have really hit maturity where they have stabilized at a level where you know how many points today it will take to draw x tag starting from zero. Quantitatively I would love to see what state by state the rate of new point buyers, people dropping out and people getting tags. Its definitely excel that I wouldn't mind starting to track out of curiosity. I'd also like to see the median and mean points for limited entry tags state by state year over year.
I think you have to prioritize the spectrum of states by value, availability of tags and add states in a logical order starting with states like Wyoming/Colorado and ending with Oregon/NV/UT as places where points will net you a return at least in a numeric sense. While you are building points you need to apply like mad to New Mexico and Idaho because until you have many years in PP/Bonus point states they are you best odds while filling in your vacation days with OTC/Leftover tags.
To answer you question simply, I wouldn't buy Utah bonus points until I had gotten Wyoming, Colorado, Montana and Arizona first with apps in to New Mexico and Idaho. I don't like a lot of things coming out of Utah politically and I don't feel like donating to their cause for something I might see in the future.
Bucksnorts
New member
- Joined
- May 6, 2016
- Messages
- 12
You can draw an archery elk tag with 8 points as a non-resident. I did it three years ago and was at the top of the points column. It wasn't the best unit in the state but the hunt was great and I killed a good bull.
Zim
Well-known member
Buzz,
Have you looked at the catastrophic odds Utah has for sheep compared to any other state? Haha have you counted all the zero's? As in like 1/10,000? The Don is banking on folks not knowing/caring if it's one zero or four!
Have you looked at the catastrophic odds Utah has for sheep compared to any other state? Haha have you counted all the zero's? As in like 1/10,000? The Don is banking on folks not knowing/caring if it's one zero or four!
Zim
Well-known member
Reality hard to handle?
Just speaking the honest truth instead of spinning dreams at the expense of young guy's investments.
There's such a thing as stupid money...............and there's no shortage of it in Utah.
Last edited:
Zim
Well-known member
Eight points three years ago would put you squarely in front of the huge mass of applicants resulting from the species/application rule change which took place ~2009. A guy entering on the ground floor today is an entirely different ballgame. That is what so many overlook.
Zim
Well-known member
Flatland Crusoe.................BINGO every sentence! Rookies read up.
BuzzH
Well-known member
If you want to hunt sheep, goat, and moose...you apply for every state that you have a chance to draw if you ever want to hunt any of those.
I drew a NR desert sheep in AZ, by the odds, I shouldn't have. Drew moose in MT, by the odds, I shouldn't have wasted my time to apply. Drew a goat in Montana, by the odds I shouldn't have wasted my time. Drew AK musk ox, by the odds, I shouldn't even have applied. Care for me to go on, or do you get the point?
A good friend of mine has drawn NR sheep in MT and also the Idaho sheep raffle tag...odds not much better than Utah. He also has drawn 3 musk ox tags in AK...all very low odds.
The guys that I know that draw the most, they apply the most...simple as that.
Hunting, in of itself, is a piss poor investment...applying for States with low odds, is a tiny fraction of the over-all hunting "investment" (when viewed simplistically as the net investment is only viewed in obtaining a tag).
I don't mind supporting wildlife, even if I never get a tag or the chance to kill an animal.
As much as you worry about the cost of applications and your constant worrying/whining about odds, points, etc...I cant fathom why you even bother to hunt?
I bet you're a load of fun in an elk camp...
