Wyoming Bill- HB 0043

[WoodMoose]

A lot has been posted on the change in WY to a 90/10 split; particularly if preference points will be applicable, or if a shift to bonus points or squared bonus points is in the future.

I had a model to estimate the time it may have taken to draw a mid-tier bighorn tag in the preference point pool. Average attrition by point category over the years (separated by dropouts and those drawn) and the percent of applicants who apply (versus buy points) were the major drivers.

Attrition was always high in lower point groups. For example, from 2018-2022, those with Max-19 to Max-21 points dropped out at an average rate of 13%/year.

Those applicants within 4 points of the maximum also averaged higher attrition (17%), but this was obviously driven by those drawing (14%) versus those dropping out (3%).

In between these two groups, attrition was consistent across years and point categories at 4.5+1.3% / year.

The percent of point holders who actually apply for a license averaged 29%, with low point holders applying less and higher point holders applying more often.

I fall into the Max-6 group, 21 points going into 2022. According to the WY G&F, I share this place with 314 other NR. The next group (Max-5) is also large relative to the quota - 282. Above that, there are a total of 106 point holders in the Max to Max-4 range (they got in when you still had to apply to receive a tag).

BEFORE to 90/10 change, it was clear I had about a 10-12 year wait assuming populations and quotas remained the same; putting me in my last 50’s. With the new NR Allocation, I’ll be in my well into 70’s before my point pool is even in the running. This assumes no other change in attrition or quotas.

It is difficult to predict what the 90/10 change will do to attrition numbers, but one can guess it will be large for those with fewer points; and small for the Max to Max-4 point group (they’re still in the running). Who knows what it will be in the Max-5 to Max-7; but from the data I’ve looked at there would be ZERO reason to believe you will ever draw a preference point tag if you are in the Max-7 or fewer points range (20 or less).

There’s close to 9,000 people in that category, and their preference point fees would add over 1.3 Million to the G&F budget. Many have guessed that attrition in the preference point system may be large, and the department may implement a bonus point style scheme in response. Which prompted me to do a quick and dirty look at what this could mean.

Below is a table to use as an example. It is looking at what “bonus point squared” program would have meant in 2021, sheep area 5, 10% of tags to NR (I used the 2.4, but I’d guess it would be rounded down). The important thing is to see what the impact of the bonus point system would be versus a straight random draw (0.174%).

In 2021, no max point holder applied, if one had he would have had a 0.85% chance, less than 1% but almost 5x better than 0 points. If you were a max point holder in a “bonus point squared” scenario, you would have had an almost 8% chance of drawing IF you had applied every year. Interestingly, it would have taken 20 years in the bonus point system to get better cumulative of odds than if the system had been random (like ID or NM) (highlighted) yellow.

Also interesting, it would take 12 or more points to have better odds in any given year than in a random draw (blue).


View attachment 219234View attachment 219234

That’s interesting analysis- thanks

I’m very interested in how this plays out

 

[thusby]

Are we supposed to feel bad for you? Your money has gotten you more and better hunts than most of us will ever see. You probably sacrificed to make that happen. I sacrifice to live and work in WY.

God, ain’t this the truth. About the 200th time in a year that I had to retrieve my blown over garbage can from the neighbor’s yard, I would probably say, “y’know what, we should keep more of those big 3 tags”.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

God, ain’t this the truth. About the 200th time in a year that I had to retrieve my blown over garbage can from the neighbor’s yard, I would probably say, “y’know what, we should keep more of those big 3 tags”.

If wind is the currency let’s go 95/5 .

The point is, here’s a guy — @LopeHunter — who has shared some great hunts that he’s accomplished, and the successful career that’s allowed him to do so. That’s one way to do it.
I work in public service, not a lucrative field. Therefore I live in a state with good hunting opportunities because I want to go on great hunts each year. Another way to do it.
This concept seems to make people so upset.

 

[BAKPAKR]

A lot has been posted on the change in WY to a 90/10 split; particularly if preference points will be applicable, or if a shift to bonus points or squared bonus points is in the future.

I had a model to estimate the time it may have taken to draw a mid-tier bighorn tag in the preference point pool. Average attrition by point category over the years (separated by dropouts and those drawn) and the percent of applicants who apply (versus buy points) were the major drivers.

Attrition was always high in lower point groups. For example, from 2018-2022, those with Max-19 to Max-21 points dropped out at an average rate of 13%/year.

Those applicants within 4 points of the maximum also averaged higher attrition (17%), but this was obviously driven by those drawing (14%) versus those dropping out (3%).

In between these two groups, attrition was consistent across years and point categories at 4.5+1.3% / year.

The percent of point holders who actually apply for a license averaged 29%, with low point holders applying less and higher point holders applying more often.

I fall into the Max-6 group, 21 points going into 2022. According to the WY G&F, I share this place with 314 other NR. The next group (Max-5) is also large relative to the quota - 282. Above that, there are a total of 106 point holders in the Max to Max-4 range (they got in when you still had to apply to receive a tag).

BEFORE to 90/10 change, it was clear I had about a 10-12 year wait assuming populations and quotas remained the same; putting me in my last 50’s. With the new NR Allocation, I’ll be in my well into 70’s before my point pool is even in the running. This assumes no other change in attrition or quotas.

It is difficult to predict what the 90/10 change will do to attrition numbers, but one can guess it will be large for those with fewer points; and small for the Max to Max-4 point group (they’re still in the running). Who knows what it will be in the Max-5 to Max-7; but from the data I’ve looked at there would be ZERO reason to believe you will ever draw a preference point tag if you are in the Max-7 or fewer points range (20 or less).

There’s close to 9,000 people in that category, and their preference point fees would add over 1.3 Million to the G&F budget. Many have guessed that attrition in the preference point system may be large, and the department may implement a bonus point style scheme in response. Which prompted me to do a quick and dirty look at what this could mean.

Below is a table to use as an example. It is looking at what “bonus point squared” program would have meant in 2021, sheep area 5, 10% of tags to NR (I used the 2.4, but I’d guess it would be rounded down). The important thing is to see what the impact of the bonus point system would be versus a straight random draw (0.174%).

In 2021, no max point holder applied, if one had he would have had a 0.85% chance, less than 1% but almost 5x better than 0 points. If you were a max point holder in a “bonus point squared” scenario, you would have had an almost 8% chance of drawing IF you had applied every year. Interestingly, it would have taken 20 years in the bonus point system to get better cumulative of odds than if the system had been random (like ID or NM) (highlighted) yellow.

Also interesting, it would take 12 or more points to have better odds in any given year than in a random draw (blue).


View attachment 219234View attachment 219234

I think @WYexile might be able to give @wllm1313 a run for his money when it comes to generating statistics and tables.

On the thread topic, I would probably be pretty bummed if I were still putting in for a NR moose tag and I was a couple of points down from where I needed to be. OIL does not affect me as I had already decided that I was not going to start playing the points game again after my waiting period ended.

I dropped out of the sheep draw a long time ago due to the wilderness guide requirement. Had it not been for that requirement, I would probably still be sending my money in every year and still be getting disappointed a couple of months later after learning that I was a point or two behind those who drew.

 

[mr_steve]

A lot has been posted on the change in WY to a 90/10 split; particularly if preference points will be applicable, or if a shift to bonus points or squared bonus points is in the future.

I had a model to estimate the time it may have taken to draw a mid-tier bighorn tag in the preference point pool. Average attrition by point category over the years (separated by dropouts and those drawn) and the percent of applicants who apply (versus buy points) were the major drivers.

Attrition was always high in lower point groups. For example, from 2018-2022, those with Max-19 to Max-21 points dropped out at an average rate of 13%/year.

Those applicants within 4 points of the maximum also averaged higher attrition (17%), but this was obviously driven by those drawing (14%) versus those dropping out (3%).

In between these two groups, attrition was consistent across years and point categories at 4.5+1.3% / year.

The percent of point holders who actually apply for a license averaged 29%, with low point holders applying less and higher point holders applying more often.

I fall into the Max-6 group, 21 points going into 2022. According to the WY G&F, I share this place with 314 other NR. The next group (Max-5) is also large relative to the quota - 282. Above that, there are a total of 106 point holders in the Max to Max-4 range (they got in when you still had to apply to receive a tag).

BEFORE to 90/10 change, it was clear I had about a 10-12 year wait assuming populations and quotas remained the same; putting me in my last 50’s. With the new NR Allocation, I’ll be in my well into 70’s before my point pool is even in the running. This assumes no other change in attrition or quotas.

It is difficult to predict what the 90/10 change will do to attrition numbers, but one can guess it will be large for those with fewer points; and small for the Max to Max-4 point group (they’re still in the running). Who knows what it will be in the Max-5 to Max-7; but from the data I’ve looked at there would be ZERO reason to believe you will ever draw a preference point tag if you are in the Max-7 or fewer points range (20 or less).

There’s close to 9,000 people in that category, and their preference point fees would add over 1.3 Million to the G&F budget. Many have guessed that attrition in the preference point system may be large, and the department may implement a bonus point style scheme in response. Which prompted me to do a quick and dirty look at what this could mean.

Below is a table to use as an example. It is looking at what “bonus point squared” program would have meant in 2021, sheep area 5, 10% of tags to NR (I used the 2.4, but I’d guess it would be rounded down). The important thing is to see what the impact of the bonus point system would be versus a straight random draw (0.174%).

In 2021, no max point holder applied, if one had he would have had a 0.85% chance, less than 1% but almost 5x better than 0 points. If you were a max point holder in a “bonus point squared” scenario, you would have had an almost 8% chance of drawing IF you had applied every year. Interestingly, it would have taken 20 years in the bonus point system to get better cumulative of odds than if the system had been random (like ID or NM) (highlighted) yellow.

Also interesting, it would take 12 or more points to have better odds in any given year than in a random draw (blue).


View attachment 219234View attachment 219234

This is very interesting, thank you for sending it over. I feel bad for those who have been chasing those tags. I was fortunate to recognize it was a long line so I didn’t jump in. I understand WY’s move and the benefit the residents will receive. The impacts on the budget will be interesting as I’d expect mid to low NR point holders to drop out causing budget cuts. I’d prefer straight random for OIL tags and a system like AZ for deer, elk and lope.


I’d be curious about your opinion on Eastman’s claims like the 53 years to draw. That number doesn’t account for being dropping out due to health or death obviously. Is there some truth to what he is saying? Seems to be some dislike for his numbers but nobody has other numbers to challenge him. You seem to have a solid understanding of the numbers!

 

[DJ1]

I think @WYexile might be able to give @wllm1313 a run for his money when it comes to generating statistics and tables.

On the thread topic, I would probably be pretty bummed if I were still putting in for a NR moose tag and I was a couple of points down from where I needed to be. OIL does not affect me as I had already decided that I was not going to start playing the points game again after my waiting period ended.

I dropped out of the sheep draw a long time ago due to the wilderness guide requirement. Had it not been for that requirement, I would probably still be sending my money in every year and still be getting disappointed a couple of months later after learning that I was a point or two behind those who drew.

Don’t even get people started about the “wilderness” requirement. What a joke that is.

 

[RobertD]

I’d be curious about your opinion on Eastman’s claims like the 53 years to draw. That number doesn’t account for being dropping out due to health or death obviously. Is there some truth to what he is saying? Seems to be some dislike for his numbers but nobody has other numbers to challenge him. You seem to have a solid understanding of the numbers!

Not who you asked, but your question is pretty straightforward. The 53 years number is probably correct (if all variables like population and tags stayed the same for that long) but Eastman's actual numbers aren't what people took issue with. It was more the tone of the article and some other claims made that people disliked.

 

[WYexile]

This is very interesting, thank you for sending it over. I feel bad for those who have been chasing those tags. I was fortunate to recognize it was a long line so I didn’t jump in. I understand WY’s move and the benefit the residents will receive. The impacts on the budget will be interesting as I’d expect mid to low NR point holders to drop out causing budget cuts. I’d prefer straight random for OIL tags and a system like AZ for deer, elk and lope.


I’d be curious about your opinion on Eastman’s claims like the 53 years to draw. That number doesn’t account for being dropping out due to health or death obviously. Is there some truth to what he is saying? Seems to be some dislike for his numbers but nobody has other numbers to challenge him. You seem to have a solid understanding of the numbers!

To be honest, I don’t read Eastman’s stuff, so I’m not familiar with his 53 years assessment or how he came to it.
One thing is for sure: historic attrition numbers, % point holders actually applying, and other data points are going to drastically change in the next few years, so it is not possible for anyone to give an accurate estimate; especially to the year.

Even before the 90/10 split, he was probably within a decade or so in his guess though. preference points for a sheep tag in WY is pretty straightforward: start at age 12, don’t miss years, and live healthy so you can outlive the other applicants.

Unless you got into it before ( or very shortly after) they stopped requiring you to apply for the license (late 90’s) to get a point. If you did, you are in the one time minority group who can benefit from preference points.

 

[WapitiBob]

"There will be no tags available for the random draw and as a result, under the current demand the number of preference points required to draw a nonresident sheep tag in Area-2 will now be 53 preference points and counting! Yes, you read that correctly this “middle of the road” sheep hunt will now take more than 50 preference points to draw! "

He's not too bright or he sucks at writing. A nr will draw with a whole lot less than 53 points.

 

[RobertD]

He's not too bright or he sucks at writing.

Option C, he's counting on a not too bright audience that sucks at reading.