Utah Elk Draw

[hossblur]

You guys again aren't comparing apples to apples.

Unit 40 in Idaho is 2%(to use your number, i think it is lower)

It will be 2% for the next 25 yrs. In 25 years tge Henries tag won't still be .01.

Same as the Beaver. Without points(I hate points, wish they would die), whatever Idaho unit you apply for stays stagnant. You conceivably could apply your whole life and not ever draw. And at 2x the license cost to do so. You would eventuslly draw Utah.

Wyoming will hold $1200 ish dollars. Until summer. NM will hold nearly 800.

If you have a $1000 budget, those 2 states have your money. You are shut down.

Utah has less than $150 if you apply for everything.

That's less than Arizona's license to start.
And then AZ just cut tags by up to 50%.

Life is tough for all NR, no doubt.

And 2 years ago, is agree.

But there is no where yore gonna hunt rifle for 380 class elk, in the rut. I've been on the Manti and Wasatch for it. You ain't hunting anywhere with a rifle that compares, so lije I say, apples to oranges.

But im great if everyone stays home, you're just a fool to do so.

 

[Carnage2011]

You guys again aren't comparing apples to apples.

Unit 40 in Idaho is 2%(to use your number, i think it is lower)

It will be 2% for the next 25 yrs. In 25 years tge Henries tag won't still be .01.

Same as the Beaver. Without points(I hate points, wish they would die), whatever Idaho unit you apply for stays stagnant. You conceivably could apply your whole life and not ever draw. And at 2x the license cost to do so. You would eventuslly draw Utah.

Wyoming will hold $1200 ish dollars. Until summer. NM will hold nearly 800.

If you have a $1000 budget, those 2 states have your money. You are shut down.

Utah has less than $150 if you apply for everything.

That's less than Arizona's license to start.
And then AZ just cut tags by up to 50%.

Life is tough for all NR, no doubt.

And 2 years ago, is agree.

But there is no where yore gonna hunt rifle for 380 class elk, in the rut. I've been on the Manti and Wasatch for it. You ain't hunting anywhere with a rifle that compares, so lije I say, apples to oranges.

But im great if everyone stays home, you're just a fool to do so.

You need to take a probability class.

 

[Pelican]

The problem with applying in UT isn’t just that the odds are terrible, it’s that the odds are terrible and getting worse. In 2014 there were 81 years worth of NRs in the limited elk pool. In 2019 there were 121 years worth of NRs. In 2018, almost 5000 new folks jumped into the limited elk draw. UDWR issued 269 NR limited bull elk tags in 2019.
Same pattern is occurring with other species. In 2014, there was 1289 years worth of NRs in the Rocky Mtn bighorn pool. In 2019, it’s now 2784 years worth of applicants. One bonus point a year doesn’t even begin to offset the number of new applicants.

 

[ImBillT]

You guys again aren't comparing apples to apples.

Unit 40 in Idaho is 2%(to use your number, i think it is lower)

It will be 2% for the next 25 yrs. In 25 years tge Henries tag won't still be .01.

Same as the Beaver. Without points(I hate points, wish they would die), whatever Idaho unit you apply for stays stagnant. You conceivably could apply your whole life and not ever draw. And at 2x the license cost to do so. You would eventuslly draw Utah.

Wyoming will hold $1200 ish dollars. Until summer. NM will hold nearly 800.

If you have a $1000 budget, those 2 states have your money. You are shut down.

Utah has less than $150 if you apply for everything.

That's less than Arizona's license to start.
And then AZ just cut tags by up to 50%.

Life is tough for all NR, no doubt.

And 2 years ago, is agree.

But there is no where yore gonna hunt rifle for 380 class elk, in the rut. I've been on the Manti and Wasatch for it. You ain't hunting anywhere with a rifle that compares, so lije I say, apples to oranges.

But im great if everyone stays home, you're just a fool to do so.

You will not be guaranteed to eventually draw any of the highly desired UT tags. Many of them have 100-200 NR applicants per NR tag. That means 100-200 years to cycle through the current applicants. Some of them will die. Some will stop applying. Some of them will start applying for the tags with 15-20 applicants per tag and that will result in point creep. If you do not already have 10-12 points in UT, the random is the only way you’ll be guaranteed to draw any of the hunts that most people enter UT to hunt. With only a few hunts with over 2%(about once per fifty years) random odds, UT is only worth entering for those that are already in every other state they want to hunt except NV...which is even worse.

 

[BuzzH]

You need to take a probability class.

What does that class say about applying for multiple tags, in multiple states, for multiple species, with 2-5% draw odds over a 30-50 year time frame?

 

[ImBillT]

The problem with applying in UT isn’t just that the odds are terrible, it’s that the odds are terrible and getting worse. In 2014 there were 81 years worth of NRs in the limited elk pool. In 2019 there were 121 years worth of NRs. In 2018, almost 5000 new folks jumped into the limited elk draw. UDWR issued 269 NR limited bull elk tags in 2019.
Same pattern is occurring with other species. In 2014, there was 1289 years worth of NRs in the Rocky Mtn bighorn pool. In 2019, it’s now 2784 years worth of applicants. One bonus point a year doesn’t even begin to offset the number of new applicants.

I’m all for people applying who have the money to do so. I’m also all for everyone having the information you just provided! I have a very limited budget, and I apply my dollars the way I believe is best for me and attempt to get the most result for my money according to my own goals and dreams. Unfortunately, I believe that an awful lot of people are applying in places they will never draw with the expectation that they WILL draw EVENTUALLY. It’s just not true.

 

[ImBillT]

What does that class say about applying for multiple tags, in multiple states, for multiple species, with 2-5% draw odds over a 30-50 year time frame?

Give me the number of states, and number of species, and I’ll give you the odds of drawing at least one, at least two, and at least three tags at 1%, 2% and 5%. Depending on when you repost, and what I end up doing with the rest of my evening, I might answer tonight, or a few days from now. The weather looks like I should be able to work a lot over the next few days, so while I might make a few quick irritating posts, I may or may not have time for math. If I don’t answer in a couple days, pm me to remind me.

I use 1% and twenty years for my own purposes. I’m not so sure fifty years is that wise a number to bet on. Additionally, a lot of the really desirable tags have odds of 1% or less. 1% would be quite high for sheep unless you’re in the max point pool, and I’d guess that a lot of sheep tags are under 1% even for max point holders.

If you apply for five 1% hunts over a twenty year period there is only a 63% chance that you’ll draw at least one tag.
Put another way, 37/100 people who apply for five hunts per year with 1% odds for twenty consecutive years will not draw a single tag.

 

[Carnage2011]

What does that class say about applying for multiple tags, in multiple states, for multiple species, with 2-5% draw odds over a 30-50 year time frame?

It says you’ll draw some tags..

 

[Pelican]

The success ratio for UT limited bull elk applicants with 11 points was 2% in 2019. Anything less than 11 points gets much worse (10 points = success ratio of 1%) as it coincides with the change to where NRs could apply for all species each year. Run the numbers for 1% over 30 years vs 2% and 2% seems great. OIL species ratios are exponentially worse. The change to allow NRs to apply for all species that occurred in UT 10 years ago is the culprit. Roulette odds are sounding like a much better option.

 

[Kiwi]

What does that class say about applying for multiple tags, in multiple states, for multiple species, with 2-5% draw odds over a 30-50 year time frame?

Isn’t it 2 - 5%?

Your odds don’t accumulate, apply for 100 draws at 1% odds and it’s still 1%.

 

[Mattff200]

I fully jumped onto the western NR world last year. In am aware of the low odds. I would recommend over Nevada based solely on cost. But it is every applicants choice to decide what they want out of a hunt. I'm originally from the beast coast so general units in Wyoming dont seem crowded at all to me. Are you looking for a good bull with an experience of less people on the mountain or do you have to shoot a 400" bull.

 

[Roughwater]

Imbuit says: "The very first page of UT draw stats shows that there are 65 NR applicants per tag. That means it would take 65yrs to get each current applicant one hunt in the best case. Because there are some hunts that aren’t worth the trip and the five year waiting period, most of the hunts that are desirable to a NR have even worse odds than the 65yr average would be."

I'm 70 and zero points so in 65 years I could maybe have a tag? I'd be 135 years old so yea, I'd go for that but then again I guess I'm an optimist.

 

[ImBillT]

Isn’t it 2 - 5%?

Your odds don’t accumulate, apply for 100 draws at 1% odds and it’s still 1%.

No. Odds don’t accumulate, they compound. If you apply for a 1% odds hunt 100 times you have a about a 63% chance of drawing at least once, and a 37% chance of never drawing.

I tried calculating the odds of drawing at least twice and at least three times, and made some mistakes. Gonna have to refresh my memory on that when I get the chance. I’m sure google will straighten me out in after a few minutes.

Point systems reduce the number of people that draw repeatedly. They also result the wait time for a 1% draw hunt progressing toward 100yrs. That’s how long it would take to clear out all the entrants from the initial year. With a pure priority point, initial entrants would not be cleared for 100yrs, second year entrants would not even have a shot until year 101. With hybrid draws the priority line takes even longer to clear and the random odds get slashed further. It’s impossible for a point system to increase opportunity. All they do is skew distribution in favor of those who have been in the system the longest. Pure random draws have an even distribution of tags from new entrants to fifty year participants.

Edited out my misleading mathematic errors.

 

[BuzzH]

Isn’t it 2 - 5%?

Your odds don’t accumulate, apply for 100 draws at 1% odds and it’s still 1%.

Not what I recall when I took statistics in College.

 

[BraidenR]

25 of those 63 would draw three times, 15 would draw twice, 23 would draw once and 37 would never draw.

25*3=75
15*2=30
23*1=23
75+30+23=128. Somehow your statics class has your math off. Your giving out more tags then you have.

Not what I recall when I took statistics in College.

This I agree with.

 

[ImBillT]

25*3=75
15*2=30
23*1=23
75+30+23=128. Somehow your statics class has your math off. Your giving out more tags then you have.

This I agree with.

The 63% chance of drawing at least once and 37% chance of not drawing is correct. It’ll probably take me ten to thirty minutes with pen and paper plus some refreshing of my memory rather than one minute and an iPhone to figure what I screwed up beyond that point. I may get to when I get home or I might not. Someone who works with stats all the time could probably do it in 30 seconds on an iPhone. But yes, your numbers suggest a mistake.

Edited out the erroneous numbers of the post you quoted to avoid misleading anyone.

 

[hossblur]

The problem with applying in UT isn’t just that the odds are terrible, it’s that the odds are terrible and getting worse. In 2014 there were 81 years worth of NRs in the limited elk pool. In 2019 there were 121 years worth of NRs. In 2018, almost 5000 new folks jumped into the limited elk draw. UDWR issued 269 NR limited bull elk tags in 2019.
Same pattern is occurring with other species. In 2014, there was 1289 years worth of NRs in the Rocky Mtn bighorn pool. In 2019, it’s now 2784 years worth of applicants. One bonus point a year doesn’t even begin to offset the number of new applicants.

That's not no

You need to take a probability class.

What does your probability show?

20 years from now what's your probability to draw a tag in idaho with a 2.9% chance?

I'm guessing. 2.9%.

And that's IF no others apply.

Based on numbers of NR jumping in elsewhere, should we get on if it will be 2.9% even next year?


I hate the points schemes.

But FOR THE MONEY, you can apply 4 times for what it costs you to apply once in Idaho. Or Arizona. Or Nevada.

Sure NM or Wyoming are cheaper. But your money is tied up. With Wyoming, it's tied up through most of draw season.

Randy and Cory did the $1000 budget podcast.

Wyoming ate your budget.

 

[WapitiBob]

I don't care if there are 10,000 years worth of applicants as long as I'm the guy with max points for the hunt I applied to or I got a good random number. I drew with 5, went thru the wait period and can draw again now. It wouldn't be a top end tag but I'll go before I sit at home. As mentioned, for the money it's a no brainer for me.

 

[NoWiser]

I've got 7 points and put in for lower tier tags. I don't ever PLAN on drawing, but I HOPE that someday I will. That hope is worth the price tag, for me.

 

[rtraverdavis]

What does that class say about applying for multiple tags, in multiple states, for multiple species, with 2-5% draw odds over a 30-50 year time frame?

This application mindset is what I subscribe to. Utah is a neat place that my dad grew up hunting with his dad. I want to hunt there, simple as that. Likely won’t be this year, or the next ten, but a tag will come eventually if I’m consistent.