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

[LousyResident]

Just saw the email in my inbox and I'm sure a bunch of you got it as well. Post up your thoughts to help us less informed make more informed decisions.

"There are three primary components of the changes recommended:

1) Transition from a prescriptive draw where 75% of licenses are drawn from the top point holders to a system that is completely random.

2) Transition to a weighted bonus point system where an applicant’s advantage in the draw increases exponentially with each subsequent year they continue to apply. The Taskforce recommends this be implemented by squaring an applicant’s total number of bonus points.

3) Delay implementation by up to four years from the date the law is effective to provide long term applicants with the highest numbers of preference points a transition period."

Wyoming Game and Fish Department - Wyoming Preference Points System

The Wyoming Wildlife Taskforce has developed a proposal that could impact how preference points are used in the Wyoming moose and bighorn sheep draws. Learn what it means for current and future point holders and tell us what you think.

wgfd.wyo.gov

 

[rogerthat]

Comment submitted in favor of this change but I’m a mid tier points guy so this benefits my odds.

 

[DFS]

Moose sheep and goat or deer and elk too?

 

[NoWiser]

Commented in favor of random or regular (not squared) bonus points.

 

[LousyResident]

Moose sheep and goat or deer and elk too?

Just moose and sheep, title updated.

 

[Nick87]

No email. It's as if they're admitting to knowing I'll never see another tag...

 

[Cheesehead]

In favor of a change as the current system makes no sense for no/low point folks

Random odds are good odds —> #1

 

[rogerthat]

The only issue I have going to a full random system is how to you give people some value for the points they purchased already? Seems like they should get something

 

[DFS]

The only issue I have going to a full random system is how to you give people some value for the points they purchased already? Seems like they should get something

Pat on the back for supporting wildlife seems fair.

 

[LousyResident]

The only issue I have going to a full random system is how to you give people some value for the points they purchased already? Seems like they should get something

The full random isn't proposed without points. It's proposed instead of specifically pulling 75% of the tags out for top point holders. So top (and all others for that matter) point holders would still get extra names in the hat or whatever, but wouldn't have that percentage of tags set aside for them. Basically everyone under the top point holders get a shot, however slim, at all tags rather than only 25%.

 

[LopeHunter]

F&G are hooked on point fee and application fee from non-residents. Keep non-resident tags at 10x or 20x resident fees and is an amazing high with nice trucks for all the boys and increased headcount.

But, then the point system starts to become unattractive to new entrants. WY wants more hits on the crack pipe but wants to show residents they really, really care about increasing resident draw odds by around 1%. Meanwhile, resident applications grow faster so any relief is quickly lost like water on a mound of sand. Try to sucker in folks with piles of virtually unhuntable tags such as is the case for elk in 78 and 125.

What to do?

Hey, convert the preference system to a bonus system but square points so really effectively remains a preference system but increase the random portion of the non-resident allocation. How many more tags are now in the random bucket, though? Oops.

WY knew the system would have issues even as launched the program. CO was years ahead and problems were being forecast. After the Max Pool each got tags over the first decade or two then reality hits and those better at math drop out unless have money to burn or are Max - 1 or Max - 2.

Tag revenue falls with each tag taken out of the non-resident bucket since become worth about 10 cents on the dollar. Guys that bail on the point-building dream mean point fees fall. Wait, let's raise those point fees another $25 or $100. A bit less spending on hotels and guides and stores. Fewer Six-Pack Sammy get to hunt and a few more Richie Rich which is a windfall for guides and outfitters.

Was a fun ride. It's not you WY, it is me. Really.

 

[Bambistew]

Keep moving the goal posts.

What's the next solution when bonus points squaring fails? Will it?

 

[Pucky Freak]

In my comments on the form I mentioned that if their goal was to maximize revenue through point-buying, most people are going to see squared bonus points as a scheme nearly-worthless as the current scheme. I suggested pure bonus system as the middle ground between attracting new entrants and giving current point-holders at least some value to their past purchase.

 

[TheGrayRider]

What a joke! We know it’s another government money grab. What color lipstick are we putting on the pig this go-round? Make sure we include some kind of “green” component to the changes so we can all feel morally superior to the peasant small game hunters. Hilarious.

 

[seeth07]

What I found a bit confusing about the survey was they didn't do a good job of explain the old versus the new proposal. The way I took it was that they were going to completely throw out the old 25% random/75% PP system for these two species and instead make it 100% random with squared bonus points. Am I wrong?

In the comment section I mentioned that I would much prefer a system like AZ has if they wanted to move to a bonus points system where there still is a 20% set aside for those with the most years invested.

 

[rogerthat]

Keep moving the goal posts.

What's the next solution when bonus points squaring fails? Will it?

Bonus points squared doesn’t really ever fail the odds just become so dismal that having lots of points is less of a benefit. I still think it is the best compromise. In Montana that’s what we have and for sheep odds in some of the hardest to draw units you go from having typical sheep draw odds <0.1% to 1% or so draw odds with max points. Not that much different but at least your getting a little better chance for your years and points from previous years draws. I think it’s the best compromise between going full random and people at the top of the preference point system that want things not to change.

 

[rogerthat]

What I found a bit confusing about the survey was they didn't do a good job of explain the old versus the new proposal. The way I took it was that they were going to completely throw out the old 25% random/75% PP system for these two species and instead make it 100% random with squared bonus points. Am I wrong?

No. That was how I understood the recommendation as well.

 

[hearteater]

Point systems aren’t great but bonus points systems are much better than preference point systems.

 

[hearteater]

I wish they would do the same with deer elk and antelope

 

[NEWHunter]

I told them if they’re going to quit playing the game they started they should give people their money back and then do whatever they want.