# Combining deer points into one pool.



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

A studying will be taking place to combine deer points to one system.

Personally, I like the idea of deer points going LE state wide for the draw....

It would all but eliminate the backlog of hunters in the LE point pools..
Inculding the elk and antelope .

Any Thoughts?


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> A studying will be taking place to combine deer points to one system.
> 
> Personally, I like the idea of deer points going LE state wide for the draw....
> 
> ...


No GS? NO WAY!

Utah Deer Committee and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Idea..... just like the book.


----------



## alpinebowman (Sep 24, 2007)

They would have to start letting you put in for all LE hunts at that point. I don't see cutting people out of the deer game for 6-20 years because they want to get an elk tag. And to be honest that would be fine with me. Every other start lets you apply for all critters every year. I wish they would do the same for OIL tags. I know the point creep sucks but it sucks no matter what so I would at least like a chance to draw another OIL.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

There are currently 3 deer draws (GS, LE, DH) and 3 deer points. (Lifetimers do not have to draw) 

So bounce the ideas-- 

First would be to have one deer draw/one deer point. Make it a hybrid-- Hunts which take 5 or less points to draw are awarded as preference-- similar to the current GS deer draw. Hunts that take 6 or more points to draw are awarded as bonus-- similar to the current LE Draw. Allow people to apply for deer and also elk or antelope. Cap all points at 20 or 25.

Another option would be to combine all Deer/elk/antelope into one point system and all OIL points into one point system. DEA points could be used to apply for whatever the applicant felt like that year-- Elk first choice, deer 2nd, elk 3rd, ant 4th, etc.... DEA would have no more waiting periods. The OIL point could be used on any OIL hunt-- applicant could change species from one year or decade to the next. Again, cap points at 20-25.

Give the applicant whatever their highest point total is and that is their current points-- if I have 10 LE deer and 3 GS deer then I just have 10 points. 

Points need to be capped at some point to allow applicants to catch up-- otherwise they may never reach the head of the line for hard to draw permits which take multiple lifetimes to obtain. 

Those are just random ideas-- No change will be easy and they'll never please everyone. There are positives and negatives to every point system or lack of a point system.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

There are still a few things I'm on the fence about, but I know that combining the pools would create more opportunity for those who want to hunt every year because the thousands who put in for the more coveted tags would be out of the pool for the tags with less demand. As it is now, thousands put in for LE, then compete again in the general pools. All those people would now be limited to one spot in the draws instead of two. 


All in all it's a bit of a mess. I have thought about this for a long time and look forward to the differnt perspectives.-----------SS


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The DOW opened a can of worms when they issued LL and set up the DH program that would need to be addressed before anything else. 

My take on it would be: 

Eliminate anterless and antlered point systems for all animals. 1 set of deer, elk, and antelope points. If you want to spend 10 points on a doe or a cow then do it. 

Allow residents along with non residents (who can do it now) put in for all the permits that they can afford. For this to work better require money up front.

Fix the point system now where points only count on a first choice hunt. You draw your first choice all points are now gone for that animal. Second choices are a general draw with all applicants that put in for that unit as a second choice. Third, and fourth the same way. 

As I said the LL holders and DH tag holders would have to be addressed someway but then that is a can of worms that the division needs to deal with.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

so can someone explain this idea to me? So all deer points meaning you either put in for LE deer or you put in for General Season. No doing both? Which essentially makes everything an "LE." You're either burning your points on what is considered a "GS" tag/area or waiting it out on a tougher "LE" unit? Sorry I'm still a novice when understanding the draw system.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Whatever change they make will make the overall system worse than what it is... some of the proposed solutions will eliminate a TON of hunting opportunities but hey, its Utah and we decimate our own ranks faster than any PETA initiative.

Our system IS complicated, has one glaring loophole in the Gen draw that needs to be addressed, but if a guy understands the systems, he can draw alot of hunting tags. It actually offers very good draw chances to applicants, especially compared to other states.

_*The Gen draw with the preference pt system was originally created to give tags to those who waited the longest. It was a moderately fair system Its only recently with the POORLY thought out Opt2 30 micro units that people gained the ability to milk the system.*_
*
The fix is simple: Apply and draw ANY general deer tag and you loose your preference points. First pick or 5th pick... you get a tag your points are lost. That preserves the original intent of the system, causes the least amount of side effects, and eliminates the loophole. Easy, simple.*

-DallanC


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

There is really no reason to loose all your points if your draw you second or even fourth choice. But those choices need to be draws with everyone in that pool with 0 that is zero points. I wouldn't matter if Joe hunter had 30 points and Sam hunter had 0 points. For everything other than first choice their points in the draw would be 0. 

Utah has over complicated this draw system so bad that very few can actually figure it out but those that do figure it out have a tag every year. All Utah needs to do is to look at other states that do a draw that have got it right, Colorado is one of them.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Critter said:


> There is really no reason to loose all your points if your draw you second or even fourth choice.


Yes there is because that was the original purpose of the Preference point system, and why a person with the most points gets his 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th choices drawn before someone elses 1st choice. That is the whole reason it was set up the way it was, and so distinctly different than the LE draw mechanics.

Pref People who wait the longest get first dibs on tags. Now people are purposely putting in for very poor draw odd areas to retain points to get first crack at tags in other units. Its unfair and they should loose their Gen points when scoring a Gen tag. Its just a Gen deer tag remember, not LE.

LE system should remain as it is with the exception that Packout brought up about adding a cap at some point.

-DallanC


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Dallan, Honest question. What happens when some of the General tags get where they require as many points as the LE tags? What will be the difference between an LE tag and a coveted General tag? I believe that down the road as boundaries and tag numbers evolve that there will become a group of premium General tags. If it takes 5+ years to get a tag it doesn't seem very general. 

I guess this is more of an argument of definitions, but it will be weird when there are two tag pools for deer that both have difficult and easier tags to draw. Being that there really are no more OTC tags, it seems weird to have two pools.

If the pools were combined, wouldn't the opportunity be similar with many more left over tags? Like I said, I'm not sure. Does any other state have two drawing pools for deer? The only states I know that have separate pools have a draw pool and an OTC pool like Idaho.---------SS


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

I like the idea of one point system for deer. It would be like Colorado and Arizona and many other states where if you wanna hunt every year you can or if you want to hunt a "trophy" unit then you get to wait your turn. The only way I can see it ever happening with the Lifetime license tag issue the DWR created is for LL holders to only be able to select a unit that is currently a GS unit and if they want a Henrys, Pauns, Books,etc. tag they would have to draw it with their points and forfeit their LL tag for that year, just like they have to if they draw a LE tag in our current system.

The idea that combining the deer draw into one point sytem would help alleviate the LE elk and antelope point creep is delusional. Do you really think the DWR is going to give up hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in app fee revenue? Ya right!!! If Utah does go to one point system for deer they will simply make a rule change to allow residents to apply for everything just like how nonresidents can do now to make up for the lost revenue.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Springville Shooter said:


> Dallan, Honest question. What happens when some of the General tags get where they require as many points as the LE tags? What will be the difference between an LE tag and a coveted General tag? I believe that down the road as boundaries and tag numbers evolve that there will become a group of premium General tags. If it takes 5+ years to get a tag it doesn't seem very general.


Probably people will put in for other areas that are much easier to draw. When we had 5 units people would wait 3 years for a Southern tag... but it never went higher than that. I think you only see high point numbers on Thousand lakes due almost ENTIRELY to people milking the system. Implement a draw a Gen tag / loose your points there will only be a few hardcore / local people who remain in that unit pool for very long.

We can revisit this if the points start to creep up but lets be honest, these are General Deer units... none of them warrant more than a few years wait.

-DallanC


----------



## papaderf (Aug 24, 2013)

leave the gs alone if you look at how long it takes the highest preference point holder 3 to 4 years and most are doing it to gain points. We need are youth to be involved cause they don't care about these politics then they lose the passion. How nice is it to see deer with the kids. As for changes for le hunts create new hunts but waiting 20 yrs of not drawing not good cause you die before you draw. They need to implement a hunt now for the 15 yr people cause in 5 more years it will be impossible hunt.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

papaderf, there were over 2000 youth tags that went unused this last hunting season. Perhaps that needs to be looked at.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

DallanC said:


> I think you only see high point numbers on Thousand lakes due almost ENTIRELY to people milking the system. Implement a draw a Gen tag / loose your points there will only be a few hardcore / local people who remain in that unit pool for very long.
> 
> -DallanC


What I'm concerned about is that the people who leave that pool will be entering pools like the Pine Valley that already takes 4 points to guarantee and the Wasatch West which takes 3 points to guarantee. Anyway you stack it, there is too much manure in the wheelbarrow. Some is gonna fall off and someones gonna wind up stinky.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

You know how many units would become under-hunted if there were a change to all LE?? And if you didnt care about coveted, but already had 15 points why waste it?

Best change they could do is change GS deer to be like cow elk. You draw any tag, points gone. The only way we keep our state fron being an insane pain in the a**. They switch and 100% of my deer hunting will be done in wyoming or idaho. I can drive my happy butt up there and get an OTC tag without dealing with Utahs BS. There is a reason for gs and le hunts. Goofy if they made all any bull units into LE would you also support that?


----------



## Bears Butt (Sep 12, 2007)

I need some clarity Dallan C, I'm kind of with you on your ideas, so I will put it in my own words and let's see how close I am.

Leave LE just like it is.

Take the GS hunts and if I apply for one of the 30 units and get a tag, I will lose all my "non-LE" points and begin next years drawing with zero points.

BUT, if I apply for an LE tag as first choice and then opt for a second, 3rd or 4th option and I don't draw the LE tag, but do draw one of my other options, I will lose my LE tag points as well as any preference points I may have had, again going back to zero in next years draw.

I will be able to put in for any tag available be it deer, elk, antelope and all the OIL all in the same drawing and all in the same year.

How close am I?


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Say what you will>> and do what ya do>>..Take the point system for General Archery and toss it in the nearest DUMPSTER>> Get back to State Wide Archery))-------------->
JUST SAYIN..


----------



## stick&string89 (Jun 21, 2012)

I agree with being the statewide archery back and combine all deer points.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Bears Butt said:


> I need some clarity Dallan C, I'm kind of with you on your ideas, so I will put it in my own words and let's see how close I am.
> 
> Leave LE just like it is.
> 
> Take the GS hunts and if I apply for one of the 30 units and get a tag, I will lose all my "non-LE" points and begin next years drawing with zero points.


Yes.



> BUT, if I apply for an LE tag as first choice and then opt for a second, 3rd or 4th option and I don't draw the LE tag, but do draw one of my other options, I will lose my LE tag points as well as any preference points I may have had, again going back to zero in next years draw.


No. You only loose LE points if you draw a LE tag, just as it is currently. Drawing a LE has no impact on Pref points, and Gen draw has no impact on LE points.



> I will be able to put in for any tag available be it deer, elk, antelope and all the OIL all in the same drawing and all in the same year.
> 
> How close am I?


You can put in just as it is now, you choose a LE, an OIL and a "General Season" unit.

I'm only proposing the above to close the loophole and returning the General Season Preference Pt system to is original intent, something that got broken when the 30 micro units went in place (technically people could "game" the system back when we had 5 deer units, but only for a year or so as it only took 3 years to draw southern, the most desired unit in the state at the time).

The rest of the system can remain as is.

-DallanC


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

The need to obviously fix the GS loophole, which I think will certainly be done after the study, one way or another.

Combining points to one LE system is where this should ultimately end up. In essence, free-market capitalism would apply a "value" to each tag and every hunter could decide whether they want to hunt a poor area every year, a good area every 2-3 years, or an awesome area every 10+ years. It will decrease point creep since people can't build points AND hunt every year like they do now.

I think they'll have to allow us to apply for all species, or maybe 2 out of 3, both of which will increase revenue but will NOT increase draw odds overall. I don't know whether GS and LE points should be combined into one pool, or whether each hunter gets the highest of their current points to start with.

I don't like the idea of a "point cap" since it would be a totally arbitrary number and be counterproductive to the idea of increasing chances for those that have been in the longest. If it is capped at 20 years, somebody with 20 points would have the same chance as somebody with 30 points. If we are arbitrarily start to take away the value of points after a certain time, why have points in the first place? Plus you could have the San Juan, Pauns, and Henry's all capped out eventually which would really force a b*ttplug and hurt the guys that have been in for potentially decades longer than anybody else. I see no value to this. What if it was a 20 year cap, or 30 year cap, or 10 year cap? It could be a 3 year cap... It is a totally made up number with no intrinsic value. Just keep 50% of tags for people with the most points and 50% for everybody else to fight over.


----------



## papaderf (Aug 24, 2013)

some very interesting POINTS here maybe a little confused now. These #'s may not be accurate got em off dwr.with 33415 le applicants and 3989 points purchased and 105183 gs applicants and 4426 points purchased with 3 with 12 pref.points¿ question is how do you combine the two and how it benefits who. Be nice just confused now. And 2000 youth tags isn't bad leftover that's better than 3000. Their harvest %is great that's a lot of smiling kids:mrgreen:


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Theres one deer herd in Utah. 200,000 plus or minus people want to hunt deer. 

There should be one draw. If you draw a tag, go to the back of the line and wait your turn until your turn comes up again, if you want to hunt the same unit that a lot of other guys want to hunt you'll need to wait longer. If your willing to unit a less desirable unit, you can hunt more often. If you draw any tag, FOR ANY UNIT, you got the turn you wanted, you loose all your points. 

Do the same with antlerless.

Do the same with elk.

What is so complex or hard to understand about that?

Don't allow Dedicated Hunters or Life Time Tag holders to dictate the future. Just because somebody made an error in judgement 20 years ago doesn't mean we have to live with it forever. 

If the if it's the cargo what's sinking the ship, even a half-wit captain knows he's got to dump some cargo.

However..........you have my permission to stop worrying boys, there's no changes coming.

Want to bet Skinner's SFW pig sticker the Big 5 let this ship settle on the bottom?

DC


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

osageorange said:


> Theres one deer herd in Utah. 200,000 plus or minus people want to hunt deer.
> 
> There should be one draw. If you draw a tag, go to the back of the line and wait your turn until your turn comes up again, if you want to hunt the same unit that a lot of other guys want to hunt you'll need to wait longer. If your willing to unit a less desirable unit, you can hunt more often. If you draw any tag, FOR ANY UNIT, you got the turn you wanted, you loose all your points.
> 
> ...


umm.......if that is the knife that was left at my office that you are talking about it is not yours to bet. I offered it up, had no takers and then sent it with some other scrap metal to the recycling yard.

You might want to offer up something that is yours. Keep your meds though in the event you have a moment of clarity and decide that you need them again.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

osageorange said:


> Theres one deer herd in Utah. 200,000 plus or minus people want to hunt deer.
> 
> There should be one draw. If you draw a tag, go to the back of the line and wait your turn until your turn comes up again, if you want to hunt the same unit that a lot of other guys want to hunt you'll need to wait longer. If your willing to unit a less desirable unit, you can hunt more often. If you draw any tag, FOR ANY UNIT, you got the turn you wanted, you loose all your points.
> 
> ...


There's a lot of points there that I agree with. The DWR is not held hostage by DH or LL. I'm sure both of those deals allow some sort of alteration by DWR. They only apply to General Season anyway, all it would take is a change in classification to everything Limited Entry. Neither DH or LL apply to Limited Entry... problem solved.

If DWR desires, they could continue to offer a less-desirable tag to LL holders, but if the LL-holder decides not to exercise that option, so be it. They were NOT guaranteed any tag, any time, for life. There are ways around this. Ultimately, the LL and DH tags are only by DWR discretion and is subject to change (the same way they alter seasons/weapons/dates/units every year).


----------



## Bears Butt (Sep 12, 2007)

I'm really confused about this. First off I have never played the game, never bought points etc. I have put in for LE with second choices being my preferred area to hunt muzzy deer. I have not missed a hunt yet.

So, what I would like to see is similar to what others have said.

First off It makes little or no sense to me not to allow me to put in for LE Deer, Elk AND Antelope each year. So I would like to see that implemented.

Second, If I apply for an LE deer or elk tag, I forfeit my right to apply for either in the General drawing. I would be at the mercy of OTC tags later. But that would be my choice. Go big or go home strategy.

I would keep the waiting periods in place as they are today.

Third, I should be able to apply for ALL the OIL tags each year if I want. Based on the order of drawing those tags, once I draw a tag in any given year, I lose my money on the other OIL drawings, as my name is pulled from the pool of applicants...my choice again.

I would not put a cap on anything.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

No worries Skinner, figured when you offered it, I'd leverage it. 

Let's see......a mythical knife for a mythical bet, on a mythical discussion, in a mythical reality. Surely, your not taking anything serious on this ring around the rosy school yard........... surely Skinner. 

I do believe I've figured it out....... I am off my meds......... cause y'all been liv'en on'em.

Fear not, my little garden fairies, all is well in never ever land.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

osageorange said:


> However..........you have my permission to stop worrying boys, there's no changes coming.
> 
> DC


Ya,Ya,Ya,--That's what 95% of the guys on this forum said about opt 2..:!:...


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Packout said:


> There are currently 3 deer draws (GS, LE, DH) and 3 deer points. (Lifetimers do not have to draw)
> 
> So bounce the ideas--
> 
> ...


More bounce...

I tend to like the max point idea. The way it works right now is that eventually there will be people with 70 bonus points putting in for the extemely limited once in lifetime type hunts before most start dieing off. Those who didn't start points from day one are penalized either because they weren't born yet or didn't start hunting till later. Doesn't seem like the most fair system that could be used (Kind of reminds me of the lifetimer endowment).

Another idea to throw around instead of a hard cap on the points is to establish a number of points like 25 where someone would start getting put in the bonus draw no matter how many applicants are above you with more points. This will allow those that didn't start points from day to be put in the bonus pool drawings for exteme demand tags before they get so old they don't want to hunt anymore. They will be able to think they have the possibity of being in the bonus pool before they hit their hunting half life. This would allow for more randomizing on units such as the Henry's deer, San Juan elk, OIL, etc. When it starts getting into multiple life times to draw tags, more randomization is the more fair way to go. Increasing the split to a 75% of tags for the bonus pool drawing in these situations would probably be a more fair move too. If people think they should have the opportunity to keep racking up to 70 points I guess they will at least get a few "extra numbers" so they get a little better chance.

I would go for combining the deer points. Don't add them together, but don't take any away either. If someone has 5 LE deer and 2 GS let them use them in any order they decide. I like the idea of applying those points in a bonus point or preference point manner which varies depending on unit demand with a crossover at 5 points.

IMO


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

osageorange said:


> No worries Skinner, figured when you offered it, I'd leverage it.
> 
> Let's see......a mythical knife for a mythical bet, on a mythical discussion, in a mythical reality. Surely, your not taking anything serious on this ring around the rosy school yard........... surely Skinner.
> 
> ...


more condescending blah ba blah blah blah. Your mama should have hugged you more.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

grizzly said:


> I don't like the idea of a "point cap" since it would be a totally arbitrary number and be counterproductive to the idea of increasing chances for those that have been in the longest. If it is capped at 20 years, somebody with 20 points would have the same chance as somebody with 30 points. If we are arbitrarily start to take away the value of points after a certain time, why have points in the first place? Plus you could have the San Juan, Pauns, and Henry's all capped out eventually which would really force a b*ttplug and hurt the guys that have been in for potentially decades longer than anybody else. I see no value to this. What if it was a 20 year cap, or 30 year cap, or 10 year cap? It could be a 3 year cap... It is a totally made up number with no intrinsic value. Just keep 50% of tags for people with the most points and 50% for everybody else to fight over.


Of course the hard to draw hunts would be "capped out" at some point. That is idea behind a maximum number of points. The Max cap on points would allow those who come along later to catch-up-- while still waiting decades to get into the highest pool. The number 25 comes to mind because it gives the highest point holders a few years to work through the system. It has value in the ability to put applicants on the same level for hard to draw permits. Of course a cap of 10 or 3 would be worthless. It is also worthless to allow a select few to be guaranteed to draw permits that will take others multiple lifetimes to be afforded the same opportunity.

You say the Max number of points would be arbitrary-- and you are correct. BUT the point system was started at an arbitrary point in time. Only those who were eligible to apply within a few years of the point system start are able to take advantage of the "bonus" point system for hard to draw permits. Anyone who applied for moose within 6 or so years of the start of the system will draw a permit, while someone who started applying 10+ years after the start will only be in the guaranteed pool if they out live the others with more points.

Why give 1/2 the permits to those who are in the highest pool when those behind them may wait twice as long and never draw? I am talking about units with 1 in 50+ odds of drawing.

If we had a Max cap on points a 14 year old starting today would be in the highest pool when he turns 40. I think that is a long enough time to wait to get into the highest pool and have a better chance at 50% of the tags.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I would rather see the bonus point tags be rounded up and awarded to the bonus point pool guys when there are odd number of tags are given out, than have a cap on the bonus points.
For example, right now, when there is 3 tags available, only one goes into the bonus point pool and the other two go out randomly. I wished that it was the other way around.
This method would get more of the higher point holders through the system.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

This subject has come up before and I favor combining points. Here is how I would do it.

1. General deer and LE deer points would be combined.
2. The designations used in the current LE deer units would *remain.
*3. Rules for obtaining a tag in the "LE" deer unit would be as follows;
a) LL holders would have to draw this tag through the standard draw process, as they do now. They would not automatically get one.
b) If applying for an "LE" deer unit, one could not apply for an LE elk or antelope on the same year. This would allow the elk and antelope draws to be minimally affected.

Advantages would be that the "trophy" guys would have less competition for the premium units from "general" hunters applying for LE type units, So called general unit hunters would have a bit less competition from the "trophy" guys who would not be applying for the "general" units anymore. LL holders would still get their tags but would not be "entitled" to a Henrys or Pauns tag every year, and the elk and antelope LE draws would be minimally affected.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Packout, that is a fair point about the system starting at an arbitrary time.

I thought Flinger had some good alternatives to a point cap, like his proposal that all hunters above a certain point number automatically go into the bonus draw (say 25+). That would give a major increase in probability after that level, but still give preference to those that have been in the longest. 

Combine that idea with Ridgetop's rounding bonus points upward and that would help, especially if the deer draws also were combined into one draw.

Not too complex, but those three changes would help.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Its been said a few times that trophy guys will have less competition for the LE hunts. LE hunts fon't make you a trophy guy. You may just want to hunt some of the best deer areas in the state. But, if you think all the people in the bonus pool already, tons of people, kiss their points goodbye for a crappy unit you are wrong. I imagine more people lean to LE. Eventually these point pools get bigger with the change. 

Just think... It happens in LE... They merge to one system. You say I just want to hunt. Then, you don't draw one of the better GS areas for a few years. You get to 4 points and decide that unit isn't a 4 point unit. I should put in for the better ones.... It would increase. The way the preference is now, people with 18 le deer points would draw any 2, 3, 4, 5 choice they wanted, every year!! Good for them.

Good news is there would be more OTC tags as long as people dont lose points. Most GS areas would be second, third, fourth choices and some would fall off the map and hit OTC.

Any bull tags would sell out quicker, and always sell out, because people can't hunt deer anymore. And out of state revenue would increase because many of us would believe the death of general deer hunts is BULL. You can label the areas different, but one pool=one kind of hunt.

Maybe we could have spike only tags, that would be good for the herd 

In my eyes we just fix gs to be gs. Back the old way. You get a tag, you have 0 points. That would be similar to a merge anyway. You want to wait for a 5 point gs, great. Its the only way we can keep a fair chance at hunting deer every year.

Also, last thing, I believe this would be bad for the sport. Many of you already talk about opportunity, family hunting, and recruitment. Imagine how that stuff would be if we no longer had the standard GS hunts.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

If we still have multiple choices, the hunter with 18 deer points could put in for the henry's, pans as second... Draw pans and not lose points as it sits now. Hell yeah!


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I don't think that a single person is arguing against fixing the second choice/retain points loophole. If nothing else changes, I think this will surely go away soon.....as it should.

I'm not sure that I agree that you should loose your points if you take a left over tag. That's where I think there needs to be more thought put into the system. In other words people should have the opportunity to buy left over tags after the draw without losing their points. This would help with revenue as well as provide opportunity. 

Whatever happens, noone should EVER draw on a second choice before all first choice applicants receive a tag.---------SS


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

I'm all for any system that separates LE from 'general'. I don't think guys should be allowed to put in for both. Choose one or the other but not both.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

berrysblaster said:


> I'm all for any system that separates LE from 'general'. I don't think guys should be allowed to put in for both. Choose one or the other but not both.


^^^^^ This ^^^^^^

Just look at last years LE elk pool.
53,000 applied for LE elk or elk points..2,600 LE elk permits avalible.

Of that 53K, I'd bet 3/4 of them also applied for general deer as well!

Now, If they could only choose one, That 53K would drop more than in half.

And Random,
If deer went to LE system only, points would be lost for any drawn tag,
reguardless of selection choice.........problem solved.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> ^^^^^ This ^^^^^^
> 
> Just look at last years LE elk pool.
> 53,000 applied for LE elk or elk points..2,600 LE elk permits avalible.
> ...


That ain't whats going to happen though. If they combine deer points I'll bet you they remove the restriction and allow people to put in for both deer and elk, which will destroy the draw odds.

Every **** time the Government tries to "fix something" they make it much much worse.

If they combine deer points and leave the restriction in place, watch license apps fall off a cliff and a future doubling in license costs to make up for it.

-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

As I said before, combining points and not opening the other LE hunts for in-state hunters would be the dumbest thing ever. So as a hunter, I only get to hunt deer or elk. What kind of a world is that??? Are the deer and elk populations that bad that this is necessary? Absolutely not! If science dictated that need, I would be all for it. Otherwise, I think that is an unmitigated disaster for our state. 

I am open to the idea of changing the system to a single point pool, but I haven't seen one that I can jump behind yet. If they combined the pool, what if they said only units that required 5 or less points to draw the year before were available for DH and LL hunters? Anything at 6 or more are not an option for those tag holders.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Thats another thing----Guy's keep bring up applicatin cost,
Most of the application money dose not even go to the DWR!
It is retaied by the Draw consultant company in Fallon Nevada
that run the draws----------------2.5 to 3 million
NOT TO THE DWR.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

goofy elk said:


> Thats another thing----Guy's keep bring up applicatin cost,
> Most of the application money dose not even go to the DWR!
> It is retaied by the Draw consultant company in Fallon Nevada
> that run the draws----------------2.5 to 3 million
> NOT TO THE DWR.


You have to buy a hunting license to apply correct? And most of that money does go to the DWR.

-DallanC


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

TS30 said:


> As I said before, combining points and not opening the other LE hunts for in-state hunters would be the dumbest thing ever. So as a hunter, I only get to hunt deer or elk. What kind of a world is that??? Are the deer and elk populations that bad that this is necessary? Absolutely not! If science dictated that need, I would be all for it. Otherwise, I think that is an unmitigated disaster for our state.
> 
> .


No,
Apply for deer LE, And draw,Then,

General any bull/spike only, antlerless, and control permits still avalible.

You could still hunt deer and elk both the same year.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

DallanC said:


> You have to buy a hunting license to apply correct? And most of that money does go to the DWR.
> 
> -DallanC


Yes, but they would stiil have to buy a hunting license regaurdless,
Even If just applying for deer---That number wouldn't change much.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> 53,000 applied for LE elk or elk points..2,600 LE elk permits avalible.
> 
> Of that 53K, I'd bet 3/4 of them also applied for general deer as well!
> 
> Now, If they could only choose one, That 53K would drop more than in half.


Why do you feel it is necessary to make folks apply for only one?

As I explained previously, the deer points could be combined, providing a benefit to both "so called" trophy and general hunters, yet not mess up the LE elk draws.

Is making folks choose only one the real desire/agenda of making a change in the deer draw?


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Catherder said:


> Why do you feel it is necessary to make folks apply for only one?
> 
> As I explained previously, the deer points could be combined, providing a benefit to both "so called" trophy and general hunters, yet not mess up the LE elk draws.
> 
> Is making folks choose only one the real desire/agenda of making a change in the deer draw?


Yes. Because we need to spread hunters out to limit the point creep. If everybody can apply for all tags, the point creep explodes even faster.

Hunters should be able to apply for one deer tag (GS and LE are combined) or one LE elk tag. If unsuccessful and they still wanted to hunt that year, buy a leftover deer tag, if available, or a GS elk tag.

The deer point creep would decrease dramatically since some of us would wait decades for one tag and others would take advantage of that and hunt every 1-3 years on a lesser unit. Just take a look at Colorado, they have some units with massive point creep and others that can be drawn with 0-1 points. This isn't a new concept as Colorado also has tons of OTC elk tags that have nothing to do with LE elk or deer tags whatsoever, so the concept is proven.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Two guides are against the separation eh.. Would you lose clients who want to hunt for often, or gain because the whole dang state is LE?

Goofy, how can you say that isn't what would happen? You have no clue the decisions they would make!! Logical choices don't hold wait. So I intentionally made my long post far-fetched, because it could happen as legitimately as the logical choice.

You, as someone who puts in for everything under the sun, and with the fam also being put in for everything, surprise me with the views you present here. And, you love opt 2. What was the point if this is what happened? Sure, more units are now there to not draw on.

We have no idea what a slippery slope they could turn this into. And, shout-out to lonetree, where is the science to say this is proper mgmt??


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Springville Shooter said:


> I'm not sure that I agree that you should loose your points if you take a left over tag. That's where I think there needs to be more thought put into the system. In other words people should have the opportunity to buy left over tags after the draw without losing their points.


Here is the thing, that's how points are bucketed so high and the GS system becomes the LE system.

It should be a random raffle. If they want to have preference points, any unit that is on your application should use your points. However, once the draw is completed, if you go buy one OTC I think keeping your points is fine. Then if you want to save for one unit, thats what you put in for. Whatever is left over after all is said and done, you can go wait in the other system. Its called a line.

Keep in mind, this is a general season draw we are talking about. And somehow, Utah is still managing to screw that up.


----------



## Broadside_Shot (Feb 22, 2010)

I have said time after time. Combining the points is a ploy to allow Lifetime License Holders the option to hunt the best units every year.

When they bought the Lifetime License it was agreed that they would get a tag every year. Changing the rule now will cause major lawsuits.

I like the idea of combining all of the points. The better units will be harder to draw, The lesser units will be easier, that's just the way it will be.

There are some General season units that are better for quality than the Book Cliffs right now.

I think the dedicated hunter program can be revamped but the Lifetime License Holder will be the real issue to overcome.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Broadside_Shot said:


> I have said time after time. Combining the points is a ploy to allow Lifetime License Holders the option to hunt the best units every year.
> 
> When they bought the Lifetime License it was agreed that they would get a tag every year. Changing the rule now will cause major lawsuits.
> 
> ...


pahahahaha... I always laugh at the lifetime license crap. THEY PAID for the right to do what they do. How many holders are there? 5-6000? How many people hunt in Utah?

Every year, people who are LL holders pass away. The number will never get larger, only smaller.

On the flip side, the points pools WILL get larger.

Drop the LL talk boys. They purchased the right, and deserve to have it. If I offered you a Lifetime license today for $600, I bet you would buy it!


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

Goofy, I don't remember the exact percentage (EFA posted it on here before) but the DWR keeps roughly 50% of the application fee and the company in Fallon keeps the other half. Between LE, GS, DH, and antlerless there where roughly 184,500 apps for permits or points this year. If it is 50% that the DWR keeps thats $922,500 in app fees. Going to one point/draw system would reduce point and draw applications to roughly 120,000 applications which would result in a loss of approx. $322,000 in application fee revenue per year. Like I said before, Ya right!!! Not going to happen! They will without a doubt allow residents to apply for all species to make up for the lost revenue.

Some have said in prior posts that going to one point system would reduce opportunity, NOT true. Some basic elementry level math proves that. Regardless of the type of point system in place there are only going to be so many permits available. The only thing having multiple point sytems and draws accomplishes is reduce the overall chance at drawing a permit. There were roughly 68,000 deer permits in the draw this year. Under one point/draw system there would be about 110,000 permit applications resulting in draw odds of approx. 1 in 1.6(61%) and in our current (4 types of deer permits)system there are approx. 162,500 applications for the same 68,000 permits resulting in odds of approx. 1 in 2.3(41%). If Utah does go to one point/draw system and puts a rule into place that if you draw any permit regardless of choice you lose your points without a doubt overall hunters will receive a permit more often than they do now.


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

I'm not against the LL holders in any way, shape, or form. If I was old enough at the time I would have purchased one. There are ways to still honor the agreement made and move toward one point/draw system. The LL agreement only ensures a permit every year, it does NOT ensure a permit for your favorite unit. Simply make any unit that is currently LE an unavailable option when LL holders make their selection. The DWR would still be honoring the contract and the LL holder would still get a permit to hunt. The same could be done with the DH program, only allow applications for units that are currently GS.


----------



## Broadside_Shot (Feb 22, 2010)

Yep, Exactly, they paid for it, they deserve it, that was the deal. That's why if it changes there will be problems. 5000 is plenty of people. if 50 of them want the Henry's then how will I ever get a Henrys tag?

I don't see people taking it lightly when they say "Here's your Permit" oh by the way its for the "Crap Unit" 8 hours away from where you live. That was not the deal.

I know a few LL holders that are begging for one system. They want all units to be the same and the better units will just be harder to draw but they will get to choose what area they want.

Its just my thoughts. I think its going to be hard to combine deer points into one pool.


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

Henry's, Pauns., San Juan, etc. permits are not an option for LL holders in our current system and I haven't heard any LL holders complain about not getting a permit for those units. I don't think it would be difficult or far fetched to only allow them to select a unit that is currently available for them to choose. Just my opinion.


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> ^^^^^ This ^^^^^^
> 
> Just look at last years LE elk pool.
> 53,000 applied for LE elk or elk points..2,600 LE elk permits avalible.
> ...


I, however, am not okay with only one species.

The idea in separating the LE, and GENERAL is simply to separate the guys who truly want quality from those who simply want to hunt.

To say they can't put in for another species defeats the purpose of increasing frequency of opportunity


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

I am a proponant of eliminating the general deer draw. My reasoning is this...the general draw is already LE. Running two separate and distinct deer lotteries seems illogical to me. General season implies over the counter and that simply does not exist in Utah any more and hasn't for a long time now.

Here is how I think the various issues should be addressed...there is no clean solution which is why this whole thing is a mess.

*1.* Use a preference point system. Points are used only to draw your first choice and all first choice tags are issued to max point holders. Secondary choices are randomly drawn, with each point echelon being drawn before moving to the next. Because your points gave you no advantage in the leftover draw, there is no reason to take them away. No waiting periods following a successful application.

*2.* Allow applicants to keep either their bonus points or preference points...whichever is higher. I don't know for sure, but in most cases this will be bonus points.

*3.* Eliminate the dedicated hunter program and the lifetime licenses. Obviously, the DH is easier. Grandfather all current DH license holders and it works itself out of the system in 3 years.

LL holders are promised a gereral season tag. If the draw is LE only, then technically LL holders are no longer entitled to a tag. Realistically, it is much more complicated than that. There were ~4,000 lifetime licenses issued from '84 - '94 some of those lincense holders are dead, some no longer hunt but many are still active. The DWR would likely have to compensate living LL holders to some degree.

*4.* Allow deer applicants to apply for elk or pronghorn. This destroys the odds for elk and pronghorn, but allows the DWR to recoup the lost revenue from the current system. I don't know, but assume most guys applying for LE deer would begin applying for elk or pronghorn. I see no need to open up applications for OIL across multiple species.

Scientifically this proposal does absolutely nothing! It's not meant to. It also does not affect opportunity positively or negatively. It simply changes the way tags are distributed and addresses what I perceive as incongruities in the current system. Unfortunately, it seems in this state we have learned to equate opportunity with the ability to *apply* for multiple tags. Opportunity will remain stagnant because no more or no fewer tags will be offered. The odds may change, but that is all.

It also removes the ability of trophy hunters to have their cake and eat it too. If you want a Henries tag then commit to it. You can hunt undersubscribed units until you draw your coveted tag. Give everyone else first shot at non premium units.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Dahlmer, best post yet. I vote you for Wildlife Board President.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

berrysblaster said:


> I, however, am not okay with only one species.
> 
> The idea in separating the LE, and GENERAL is simply to separate the guys who truly want quality from those who simply want to hunt.
> 
> To say they can't put in for another species defeats the purpose of increasing frequency of opportunity


+100

-DallanC


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Broadside_Shot said:


> Yep, Exactly, they paid for it, they deserve it, that was the deal. That's why if it changes there will be problems. 5000 is plenty of people. if 50 of them want the Henry's then how will I ever get a Henrys tag?
> 
> I don't see people taking it lightly when they say "Here's your Permit" oh by the way its for the "Crap Unit" 8 hours away from where you live. That was not the deal.
> 
> ...


LL holders should have a cap of no more than 15% per unit just like the DH is now.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

berrysblaster said:


> I, however, am not okay with only one species.
> 
> The idea in separating the LE, and GENERAL is simply to separate the guys who truly want quality from those who simply want to hunt.
> 
> To say they can't put in for another species defeats the purpose of increasing frequency of opportunity


Exactly. And I maintain that if done right that both the trophy and general deer hunter can receive a benefit from combining points without disrupting the elk/antelope draws.

RE; "*3.* Eliminate the dedicated hunter program and the lifetime licenses. Obviously, the DH is easier. Grandfather all current DH license holders and it works itself out of the system in 3 years.

LL holders are promised a gereral season tag. If the draw is LE only, then technically LL holders are no longer entitled to a tag. Realistically, it is much more complicated than that. There were ~4,000 lifetime licenses issued from '84 - '94 some of those lincense holders are dead, some no longer hunt but many are still active. The DWR would likely have to compensate living LL holders to some degree."

I simply do not believe it is possible to legally do that. If attempted, the subsequent lawsuit would be successful. I still maintain that keeping the special designation for the current "LE" units and continuing special rules for drawing one of these tags would allow a combined draw to work and still allow the LL holders to have their legally permitted tags in "general" units.


----------



## osageorange (Nov 20, 2010)

Condescension anyone?


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> Thats another thing----Guy's keep bring up applicatin cost,
> Most of the application money dose not even go to the DWR!
> It is retaied by the Draw consultant company in Fallon Nevada
> that run the draws----------------2.5 to 3 million
> NOT TO THE DWR.


WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! I can't count the number of times I've had to explain this!

Per the Statement of Work which is a legal part of the contract between Systems Consultants (DBA Utah Wildlife Administrative Services) of Fallon NV; (I'll write the COST page in it's entirety.)

"*COST:*

The contractor will be paid $3.01 per application based upon a guaranteed application pool of 330,000 and then $1.25 for every application processed thereafter.

Minimum application pool 330,000 at $3.01------------------- $993,300.00

Postage reimbursement will not exceed Bucks Draw-----------$132,641.00

Number of Surrender Letters Processed
Letter cost at $.50 per letter will not exceed ------------------------$250.00

Estimated 50,000 additional applications beyond the 
minimum Guarantee of 330,000 at $1.25 ------------------------$62,500.00

Harvest survey $2.00 per permit requiring survey 
(Mail all letters) ----------------------------------------------------$18,000.00

Total cost of the Bucks Statement of Work will not exceed--$1,206,691.00

*PAYMENT SCHEDULE:*

*November 15, 2013---- $180,000.00*
*December 16, 2013 ----$160,000.00*
*January 15, 2014------- $160,000.00*
*February 14, 2014 ----- $154,000.00*
*March 14, 2014--------- $154,000.00*
*April 15, 2014 ---------- $120,300.00*
*May 15, 2014 ------------ $65,000.00*

*Reimbursement of postage upon receipt of invoices.*

*Payment of Surrender Letter upon receipt of invoice.*

*Payment of Harvest Report Processing upon receipt of invoice.*"

In other words, Systems Consultants gets 31.75% while DWR gets 68.25% of the estimated $3,800,000 in application fees for the Bucks, Bulls, OIL draw.

I won't go into much detail about the services rendered for that 31.75%, but just be aware that, besides the actual draw processes, most of the communications regarding the draw (reminder cards, emails, result letters, surveys, draw history website and updates, returns, notifications of errors, permits, and phone calls either way come from Fallon NV, not Salt Lake City UT.)

(The antlerless draw is 38.85% of the estimated $430,000 in application fees for Systems Consultants and 61.15% for DWR.)

Now, what the DWR does with that money is unknown to me, but since they are audited by the state, I don't worry about it.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

My bad,

Instead of " Most", I should have put 31.75%.

And retained balance to the NEW truck fund for the DWR,,,.....;-)


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

Catherder said:


> I simply do not believe it is possible to legally do that. If attempted, the subsequent lawsuit would be successful. I still maintain that keeping the special designation for the current "LE" units and continuing special rules for drawing one of these tags would allow a combined draw to work and still allow the LL holders to have their legally permitted tags in "general" units.


You may be right, but the language in the rule is written very specifically. You can review it below...I have highlighted a couple of points.

*R657-17-1. Purpose and Authority.*

_(1) Under authority of Section 23-19-17.5, this rule provides the requirements and procedures applicable to lifetime hunting and fishing licenses._
_(2) In addition to the provisions of this rule, a lifetime licensee is subject to:_
_(a) the provisions set forth in Title 23, Wildlife Resources Code of Utah; and_
_(b) the rules and proclamations of the Wildlife Board, including all requirements for hunting permits and fishing licenses._
_*(3) Unless specifically stated otherwise, lifetime licensees shall be subject to any amendment to this rule or any amendment to Section 23-19-17.5.*_

*R657-17-2. Definitions.*

_(1) Terms used in this rule are defined in Section 23-13-2 and Rule R657-5._
_(2) In addition:_
_(a) "Lifetime Questionnaire" means a list of questions, accessible by a lifetime licensee at the division's website, used to identify the lifetime licensee's preferred choice of a general season deer permit unit and hunt type._
_(b) "Recent Lifetime Licensee Record" means the most recent general deer permit issued within the immediately preceding 3 years._
_(c) "Application Deadline" means the close of the annual Big Game application period, as established in the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game._

*R657-17-3. Lifetime License Entitlement.*

_(1) (a) A permanent lifetime license card shall be issued to lifetime licensees in lieu of an annual hunting, and fishing license._
_(b) The issuance of a permanent lifetime license card does not authorize a lifetime licensee to all hunting privileges. The lifetime licensee is subject to the requirements in Subsection R657-17-1(2)._
_(2) (a) Each year, *a lifetime licensee who is eligible to hunt big game may receive without charge, a permit for the unit of their choice for one of the following general deer hunts:*_
_*(i) archery buck deer;*_
_*(ii) any weapon buck deer; or*_
_*(iii) muzzleloader buck deer.*_
_(b) Effective January 1, 2012 all lifetime license holders must initially select a general season hunting unit during the Big Game application period as established in the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game._
_(3) Sales of lifetime hunting and fishing licenses may not be refunded, except as provided in Section 23-19-38._
_(4) Lifetime hunting and fishing licenses are not transferable._
_(5) Lifetime hunting and fishing licenses are no longer for sale as of March 1, 1994._
_(6)(a) Lifetime license holders may participate in the Dedicated Hunter Program._
_(b) Upon entering the Dedicated Hunter Program, the lifetime license holder agrees to forego any rights to receive a buck deer permit for the general archery, general any weapon or general muzzleloader deer hunts as provided in Section 23-19-17.5 during enrollment in the Dedicated Hunter Program._

*R657-17-5. Applying for Big Game Permits.*

_(1) A lifetime licensee may apply for a limited entry permit offered through the big game drawing using a bucks, bulls and once-in-a-lifetime application._
_(2) Limited entry permit species and application procedures are provided in Rule R657-62 and the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game._
_*(3)(a) If the lifetime licensee applies for and is successful in obtaining a premium limited entry, limited entry, or cooperative wildlife management unit buck deer permit in the big game drawing, a general deer permit will not be issued.*_
_*(b) If the lifetime licensee does not draw a premium limited entry, limited entry, or cooperative wildlife management unit buck deer permit in the big game drawing, the general deer permit requested on the Lifetime Questionnaire or the recent lifetime licensee record shall be issued.*_
_(4) Applying for or obtaining an antlerless deer, antlerless elk, or doe pronghorn permit does not affect eligibility for obtaining a general buck deer permit._
_(5)(a) A lifetime licensee may apply for a dedicated hunter deer permit through the big game drawing._
_(b) If the lifetime licensee applies for and is successful in obtaining a dedicated hunter deer permit in the big game drawing, a general deer permit will not be issued._
_(c) If the lifetime licensee does not draw a dedicated hunter deer permit in the big game drawing, the general deer permit requested on the Lifetime Questionnaire or the recent lifetime licensee record shall be issued._
_(6) All rules established by the Wildlife Board regarding the availability of big game permits in relation to obtaining general deer permits shall apply to lifetime licensees._

I am not an attorney and cannot speak as to whether the DWR can legally eliminate the lifetime licenses. It does appear to me though that the language in the rule would allow for wiggle room.

The rule specifically says "general season" multiple times. There is a section that speaks specifically about LE. This was obviously by design as there were a few LE deer units in 1994.

The rule also states that lifetime licenses are subject to amendments to the Utah Wildlife Code. A change such as what is being suggested would be an ammendment to that code.

Section 17-5 also provides for another avenue. Assume all first choice applications are considered limited entry because you must use preference points to draw them. Because all remaining choices are random, they could then be considered general season tags. Lifetime license holders would be first in line in each point echelon for any undersubscribed units. This may legally maintain the entitlement sold to lifetime license holders.

Again, I am not an attorney, but it appears to me that the option to change the drawing process and point system in Utah is not completely unattainable as a result of lifetime licenses.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

goofy elk said:


> My bad,
> 
> Instead of " Most", I should have put 31.75%.
> 
> And retained balance to the NEW truck fund for the DWR,,,.....;-)


 I'm sorry if I sounded harsh! I guess I shouldn't expect the majority of you to know that detailed information. After all, it took a GRAMA and a visit with Judi at the state office for me to get it, but I felt it was something we (UWC) should know when we make some presentations to the RAC's and Wildlife Board. Even they didn't/don't know most of that.

As far as the NEW trucks go, like I indicated, they are audited by the state auditor and if they need to replace trucks based on mileage or service records to do their jobs, so be it. We certainly don't need to be paying a bunch of tow fees to haul broken down equipment off the mountain. Besides, those used trucks are regularly auctioned off to the public (mostly used car dealers) and that money goes back into equipment.


----------



## grizzly (Jun 3, 2012)

Thanks Dahlmer, the code specifically states LL are entitled a general license not a limited entry tag, and that the code is subject to change.

As for the discussed theoretical lawsuit, any of you that have dealt with lawsuits knows the first question is 'standing' and the second is 'damages'. It would be impossible to claim any more damages than the initial investment (cost of LL), and that could be further diminished by the use of the LL up to that point (prorated out). Basically, this is not a huge monetary threat to DWR.

Grizzly


----------



## blazingsaddle (Mar 11, 2008)

Another honest question- Why is this being studied? Besides the loophole, what is the underlying issue that needs fixing?

Why rebuild the entire dam when a piece of bubble gum will work?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

blazingsaddle said:


> Another honest question- Why is this being studied? Besides the loophole, what is the underlying issue that needs fixing?
> 
> Why rebuild the entire dam when a piece of bubble gum will work?


THIS. Patch the loophole and leave the rest alone.

-DallanC


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I've often wondered why people are so quick to go for the sledge hammer when the scalpel will work. I don't see the huge problems with Utah's deer hunt that others see.


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

The people who want to combine the points want that only because it helps them.
They don't care who they screw to get it. (Lifetime Lisc)
Most don't want to wait "their turn" to get the LE tags like the rest of us did.
I have had an elk tag and a deer tag in my life, now I will never have a chance
to get a deer tag again. That's okay with me, now it's somebody else who gets their turn. 
(will get an elk tag again because I do archery elk, not so hard to get) 
I have a lifetime, but in NO Way do I expect to have the LE units included in my choice of areas I get to pick from for my deer tag. 
I agree with just fixing the loophole, if they draw any choice for GS hunts they have "used" their points. 
I'll get fried for saying this, that's okay, just my 2 cents.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

DallanC said:


> THIS. Patch the loophole and leave the rest alone.
> 
> -DallanC


For now this is probably the best option......kick the can down the road until the "general" tags require just as many points as the "LE" tags, then bring up the issue again.

Maybe by then the State will recognize the fiscal opportunity and we will have "general" and "LE" pools for antelope, elk, and bears as well. Application fees make the world go around you know.

Heaven knows we will always face more hunters and less resources. Maybe someday the Henry's tag will leave the deer pool and enter the OIL pool where it will still be one of the toughest tags to draw.------SS


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

2full said:


> The people who want to combine the points want that only because it helps them.
> They don't care who they screw to get it. (Lifetime Lisc)
> Most don't want to wait "their turn" to get the LE tags like the rest of us did.
> I have had an elk tag and a deer tag in my life, now I will never have a chance
> ...


It has nothing to do with screwing anyone. It's an issue of streamlining and simplifying the draw system for deer. I've had my LE elk tag already. I'll draw my LE deer tag in about 3 - 4 years. I won't be back in the LE deer game ever. This won't do anything to help my odds. I am also dedicated. I won't have the opportunity to hunt deer from August to January anymore under what I think is the best system.

When the DWR decided to impliment option 2 (which I think was stupid) they essentially turned the general season into limited entry, but they compounded the stupidity of that decision by not combining the draw systems. Now we have two limited entry deer draws in the state of utah.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I hunt deer while I wait to draw my LE elk tag. 

If points are combined, I'm either going to have to give up deer while I wait on the LE elk due to the limit of choosing a single LE to apply for, OR they will remove the restriction allowing putting in for multiple LE's which will absolutely destroy the odds in a very short amount of time for everyone. If the latter is the chosen direction, then we will need the point cap Packout brought up.

-DallanC


----------

