WY Game and Fish wants your thoughts on the preference point system (Moose and Sheep)

[Buffs35]

Unfortunately, what Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, new Mexico and other western states are teaching me is that my only hope to consistently hunt western big game is to amass enough wealth to purchase land to secure landowner tags, or at the very least, property in a unit that has private land only tags. Diy public land hunters, the bell tolls for thee.

 

[Islander]

I don't understand the proposal. How can you have totally random AND weighted bonus points? I read the letter of intent and there is no explanation of exactly how this will work. I'm not willing to assume I know what is proposed based on what I have heard about bonus points in other states.

 

[Treeshark]

western states are teaching me is that my only hope to consistently hunt western big game is to amass enough wealth to purchase land to secure landowner tags,

The easiest and cheapest route here is to try to obtain landowner tags from others, but I agree with what you said. It stinks to admit that’s the reality of things, but a lot of NRs feel the same way.

The scary part of it for me is seeing many of the diy NRs starting root for states many transferable landowner/outfitter tags as possible. Cannot blame them though, if the only options are those types of tags vs don’t hunt at all.

 

[WapitiBob]

Point systems were never implemented to make drawing a tag "fair". They were implemented to give those applying longer an advantage over those who came after; simple as that. Nowhere do they say the system is to "fairly distribute tags".


WY:

Section 21. Drawing Advantage.
The Department shall develop and maintain a license issue system that allows qualified persons, as prescribed below, who have either purchased a preference point or were unsuccessful in the preference point drawing for a full price bighorn sheep or moose license, or purchased a preference point for nonresident antelope, deer or elk, a drawing advantage in future years as prescribed in Wyoming statutes. All applicants participate in the preference point drawing regardless of their preference point balance.

AZ:

What is a Bonus Point?
An accumulated credit (or point) that authorizes the Department to issue a Big Game Drawing applicant additional computer-generated random numbers during a draw. ......
This system provides applicants with an added chance of receiving a low random number in the draw, hence improving their draw odds, while still providing a chance (no matter how small) for any applicant to get drawn.

OR:

Preference Points Explained;
Every year you do not draw your first choice hunt you get a preference point, which increases your odds in future years.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Point systems were never implemented to make drawing a tag "fair". They were implemented to give those applying longer an advantage over those who came after; simple as that. Nowhere do they say the system is to "fairly distribute tags".


WY:

Section 21. Drawing Advantage.
The Department shall develop and maintain a license issue system that allows qualified persons, as prescribed below, who have either purchased a preference point or were unsuccessful in the preference point drawing for a full price bighorn sheep or moose license, or purchased a preference point for nonresident antelope, deer or elk, a drawing advantage in future years as prescribed in Wyoming statutes. All applicants participate in the preference point drawing regardless of their preference point balance.

AZ:

What is a Bonus Point?
An accumulated credit (or point) that authorizes the Department to issue a Big Game Drawing applicant additional computer-generated random numbers during a draw. ......
This system provides applicants with an added chance of receiving a low random number in the draw, hence improving their draw odds, while still providing a chance (no matter how small) for any applicant to get drawn.

OR:

Preference Points Explained;
Every year you do not draw your first choice hunt you get a preference point, which increases your odds in future years.

I understand the intention. And "fair" is in the eye of the beholder. What many are saying is that a public govt. system that, well intentioned and reasonable at its inception, results in no citizen under the age of 55 having a reasonable chance of participating in a so called "shared resource" that it is not longer an appropriate or effective government policy and needs to be revised or removed.

 

[wytex]

I have to ask Bent and Viking, how much meat does your family and yourself eat in a year?
You keep brining up how greedy we are as residents to have multiple licenses for multiple species. You have no clue that many, many folks eat almost exclusively game meat. Many also eat beef and other domestic proteins but still have the bulk of the meat come from game.
It takes multiple animals to feed a family for a year, it's not gluttony.

 

[Labman]

…”results in no citizen under the age of 55 having a reasonable chance of participating in a so called "shared resource" that it is not longer an appropriate or effective government policy and needs to be revised or removed.

You’re embellishing numbers and not being accurate.
-There are random tags, and a 14yr old could draw one of those. So the “no citizen under the age of 55” is totally false. If you were 14 when you started you would be 41 today, but 55 sounds better.
-“Reasonable chance”…what is that in the world of realistically 1x a lifetime sheep and moose tags?

 

[VikingsGuy]

You’re embellishing numbers and not being accurate.
-There are random tags, and a 14yr old could draw one of those. So the “no citizen under the age of 55” is totally false. If you were 14 when you started you would be 41 today, but 55 sounds better.
-“Reasonable chance”…what is that in the world of realistically 1x a lifetime sheep and moose tags?

It was exemplary not mathematical. This was intended as a general discussion not a @wllm chart. And if your parents didn't hunt, or didn't have the money to buy children tags every year? You are just screwed I guess. Whatever the odds, a random chance is better policy that one that gives a citizen zero chance if they didn't join the Ponzi scheme 30 years ago.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I have to ask Bent and Viking, how much meat does your family and yourself eat in a year?
You keep brining up how greedy we are as residents to have multiple licenses for multiple species. You have no clue that many, many folks eat almost exclusively game meat. Many also eat beef and other domestic proteins but still have the bulk of the meat come from game.
It takes multiple animals to feed a family for a year, it's not gluttony.

"I keep bring up"? I mentioned it once.
"greedy we are as residents"? I leave entirely to each state how many animals are reasonable and how many makes one "greedy". I have no opinion on that. Take what you wish, but once you decide to sell some to non-res for $$, drop the Ponzi scheme of preference points is all I am saying. Having some Missouri hunter pulling 5 or 6 non-res big game tags while some other Missouri hunter doesn't get any because the first had a parent that started buying points in the crib is not good social policy.

 

[Treeshark]

I feel it is critical to the future of hunting in general that the animals we kill be viewed first and foremost as sources of food, so I’m certainly not one to bag on someone for filling the freezer to feed their family. Not for me to say what is greedy or what is not, but I do think it’s good for people to ask themselves “if every hunter did what I’m doing, would the resource handle it?”

Some instances, yes- whitetails in a lot of areas, elk in some. For many of the other big game species in the west especially, it seems that being able to utilize them as a primary food source (IE subsistence hunting) or a revenue/entertainment source (IE filming, etc) may not be something the resource can handle in 2022.

The multi-state thing Brent brought up earlier is really intriguing and has occurred to me as well- I just have no idea how you’d structure or manage such an interstate-type system like that.

 

[BuzzH]

I understand the intention. And "fair" is in the eye of the beholder. What many are saying is that a public govt. system that, well intentioned and reasonable at its inception, results in no citizen under the age of 55 having a reasonable chance of participating in a so called "shared resource" that it is not longer an appropriate or effective government policy and needs to be revised or removed.

That's a steaming load of crap and just not true.

If that were the case, then how do you explain my oldest nephew having drawn buck and doe pronghorn tags, 3 bull elk tags the past 3 years, and 2 cow tags in Wyoming...all before he's even 18 years old?

How is that my 4 NR friends have drawn 2 bull tags and 3 cow tags the past 4 seasons here, not one is over 55 and not one of them has ever had more than 4 points for elk.

The fact is the average NR hunter is not looking for opportunity, they're looking for the same "top tier" tags that everyone else is chasing. They apply for areas with historically crappy odds, are way behind in points (even with max points some are still crap odds) and complain the system isn't working. Complaining that the system needs to change because they're new to hunting, or their parents didn't apply them for points, etc.

People need to start focusing on what they CAN do, rather than focusing on what they can't.

I didn't draw the sheep or moose tags that I really wanted, I drew what I could hunt, I settled for the experience versus the best units. I don't even draw or put in for the pronghorn areas I'd most like to hunt. Same with cow permits, I put in for areas I can hunt. I drew a desert sheep tag in not even close to what unit I would have preferred, but it had the best odds and was getting less attention than other areas (sheep not as big, had experienced a die-off, etc.).

If you're a NR of Wyoming and you have very few points for deer, elk, and pronghorn...you're facing absolute shit odds to ever hunt pronghorn in unit 60, or elk in unit 100, or late mule deer in 128.

If you're complaining that you just can't hunt here because you can't draw those types of tags, well, find another shoulder to cry on...I have ZERO sympathy. Plenty that you can draw, I don't feel bad you've applied for unit 100 elk for 2 years and haven't drawn.

Its all crap, the opportunities are there for those willing to put in the work. I hear it constantly its about the "experience". I just don't buy that for a lot of the NR's that are building points, applying for tags with absolutely horrific odds, and complaining about not hunting.

I know better...

Further, most of these top tier tags everyone complains about drawing, aren't all they're cracked up to be either. Most that draw them, kill the same quality they could have the dozen or more years they wasted building points in other units.

For reference, zero point pronghorn, the 15th or so buck my NR friend has killed in the same unit. I bet 90% of the NR's drawing the red desert shoot smaller bucks after waiting 15 years or more to hunt pronghorn...

Buck I killed on a 3rd choice tag the same year in the same area:

Some of my nephews Wyoming critters...poor kid, he's so abused by the "system".

 

[Huntnut60]

There is no way in hell I will ever catch up to draw a moose or sheep tag in Wyoming. So I voted to move it to a bonus point system. I understand mathematically my chance of ever drawing is still very small but it’s still improvement from the current. I would also support moving it to it all random draw. To the people complaining that their 20+ points would be wasted, tough crap. You were never guaranteed anything. No one owes you crap.

Pretty sure when the point systems in all states were proposed and implemented, the advertising was your chances of drawing would be greatly enhanced by participating in the point system. The people with a lot of points in multiple states were just following the rules. If you are 40 yrs old and don’t have max points in Wyoming for deer, antelope and elk, that’s not my fault. You should also have 20 points for multiple species in multiple states. There are states with different systems (random, pref pt, bonus, bonus squared, hybrid) that everyone should be happy. Apply in the states you like.

 

[BuzzH]

"I keep bring up"? I mentioned it once.
"greedy we are as residents"? I leave entirely to each state how many animals are reasonable and how many makes one "greedy". I have no opinion on that. Take what you wish, but once you decide to sell some to non-res for $$, drop the Ponzi scheme of preference points is all I am saying. Having some Missouri hunter pulling 5 or 6 non-res big game tags while some other Missouri hunter doesn't get any because the first had a parent that started buying points in the crib is not good social policy.

Lots of things I find wayyyyyy more socially unacceptable than poor drawing odds or kids who's parents didn't apply them for points to hunt big-game in Wyoming, Colorado, etc.

Everyone has something they can hunt in the state they live in, concentrate on that.

 

[Huntnut60]

Pretty sure when the point systems in all states were proposed and implemented, the advertising was your chances of drawing would be greatly enhanced by participating in the point system. The people with a lot of points in multiple states were just following the rules. If you are 40 yrs old and don’t have max points in Wyoming for deer, antelope and elk, that’s not my fault. You should also have 20 points for multiple species in multiple states. There are states with different systems (random, pref pt, bonus, bonus squared, hybrid) that everyone should be happy. Apply in the states you like.

And there are sheep tags available for NR in the random draw; no pts required.

 

[BuzzH]

And there are sheep tags available for NR in the random draw; no pts required.

Yes.

True of just about any tag we want to talk about, even those with horrible odds. Most people think they should be the 1-100 that get lucky in the draw...they suck at math.

Very few states have tags with zero going to random side of a draw.

 

[VikingsGuy]

That's a steaming load of crap and just not true.

If that were the case, then how do you explain my oldest nephew having drawn buck and doe pronghorn tags, 3 bull elk tags the past 3 years, and 2 cow tags in Wyoming...all before he's even 18 years old?

How is that my 4 NR friends have drawn 2 bull tags and 3 cow tags the past 4 seasons here, not one is over 55 and not one of them has ever had more than 4 points for elk.

The fact is the average NR hunter is not looking for opportunity, they're looking for the same "top tier" tags that everyone else is chasing. They apply for areas with historically crappy odds, are way behind in points (even with max points some are still crap odds) and complain the system isn't working. Complaining that the system needs to change because they're new to hunting, or their parents didn't apply them for points, etc.

People need to start focusing on what they CAN do, rather than focusing on what they can't.

I didn't draw the sheep or moose tags that I really wanted, I drew what I could hunt, I settled for the experience versus the best units. I don't even draw or put in for the pronghorn areas I'd most like to hunt. Same with cow permits, I put in for areas I can hunt. I drew a desert sheep tag in not even close to what unit I would have preferred, but it had the best odds and was getting less attention than other areas (sheep not as big, had experienced a die-off, etc.).

If you're a NR of Wyoming and you have very few points for deer, elk, and pronghorn...you're facing absolute shit odds to ever hunt pronghorn in unit 60, or elk in unit 100, or late mule deer in 128.

If you're complaining that you just can't hunt here because you can't draw those types of tags, well, find another shoulder to cry on...I have ZERO sympathy. Plenty that you can draw, I don't feel bad you've applied for unit 100 elk for 2 years and haven't drawn.

Its all crap, the opportunities are there for those willing to put in the work. I hear it constantly its about the "experience". I just don't buy that for a lot of the NR's that are building points, applying for tags with absolutely horrific odds, and complaining about not hunting.

I know better...

Further, most of these top tier tags everyone complains about drawing, aren't all they're cracked up to be either. Most that draw them, kill the same quality they could have the dozen or more years they wasted building points in other units.

For reference, zero point pronghorn, the 15th or so buck my NR friend has killed in the same unit. I bet 90% of the NR's drawing the red desert shoot smaller bucks after waiting 15 years or more to hunt pronghorn...



Buck I killed on a 3rd choice tag the same year in the sam

Not a question if you can hunt, it is a question of reasonable allocation of shared resources. The current system favors 1 particular group over all others and that is the steaming load of crap sir. "Just be thankful for what you get" while the "special people" are over here hoarding supposedly shared resources is a lousy view of the North American model. But since you are one of the "special people" it works great for you. And you get butt-hurt if anyone questions your infinite wisdom. Carry on.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Lots of things I find wayyyyyy more socially unacceptable than poor drawing odds or kids who's parents didn't apply them for points to hunt big-game in Wyoming, Colorado, etc.

Everyone has something they can hunt in the state they live in, concentrate on that.

If it is so wonderful and fair, why don't you trade the non-WY tags you hunt with to some poor schmuck from Missouri that started hunting a few years ago. But of course you won't - you bought into the Ponzi scheme early and are getting your pay-out. Lot's of early investors with Madoff got great returns - not so much for the later "investors".

 

[DFS]

Not a question if you can hunt, it is a question of reasonable allocation of shared resources. The current system favors 1 particular group over all others and that is the steaming load of crap sir. "Just be thankful for what you get" while the "special people" are over here hoarding supposedly shared resources is a lousy view of the North American model. But since you are one of the "special people" it works great for you. And you get butt-hurt if anyone questions your infinite wisdom. Carry on.

Comments like this make me support banning nonresidents from hunting in western states.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Comments like this make me support banning nonresidents from hunting in western states.

I am not talking about NR vs. R. I repeatedly said R can have whatever they want. But if they want to sell to NR my view is they should do so without Ponzi scheme. I have no idea why Rs get upset about suggestions about how NRs split up the 20/10/5/1/whatever share - it has zero effect on Rs.

 

[TheJason]

Comments like this make me support banning nonresidents from hunting in western states.

And comments like this make me laugh when people complain about all of the “people moving to our state and ruining it “.

Why is it so hard to not be a douche?