# Anterless Rumblings



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

So the draw odds are out for antlerless. As I was looking at the numbers I noticed that in my mind some tags seems to of disappeared.

Here is what was supposed to be left over.

http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/2015/remaining_antlerless_permits.pdf

But if we go to the link below and look up some hunts Such as 4050 we see that there was 112 resident tags allocated however only 52 tags were given out in the draw. Where did the rest of the tags go since they didn't show up on the remaining antlerless permits? Same goes for 4053 it shows that 135 tags were allocated but only 113 were given in the draw. These are two examples of what I saw scanning the reports where there should of been tags leftover after the draw that didn't make it to the above list. It also seemed to carry over on some of the CWMU hunts. Hunt 4554 seems to have 30 tags allocated but only 25 were picked up in the draw. Where did they go?

http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/2015/15_antlerless_report.pdf

The next rambling is why do people put in the antlerless tags that coincide with the rifle hunt where there is control permits? A 30.00 control permit is guaranteed and costs 20.00 less than putting in and drawing the antlerless permit. a great example is the hunt 4113 where 1039 people put in for the 450 allocated tags(which seems to be missing 8 tags since only 442 drew).


----------



## Jmgardner (Sep 17, 2014)

ill give you another example because I got screwed in the process. hunt 4556 twin peaks goose creek. ten tags are supposed to be available. I put my wife and I both in for it as our first choice. your first link shows there were 3 successful residents and three unsuccessful, and yet still says it was a 1 in 1 draw. my wife and I were both in the unsuccessful category so how in the world is that a 1 in 1 and where did the other tags go? this is my first year in the system so im still learning but that don't make a whole lot of sense. seriously if anyone would care to explain this to me, id be greatly appreciative


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

The discrepancy in tags allocated compared to tags issued on the report is because only the first choice is shown. At least that was the reponse I got last year.

It would sure be nice on the antlerless and general deer draws to see the 2nd, 3rd choices, etc. although it would be pretty complicated I'm sure.


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

Jmgardner said:


> ill give you another example because I got screwed in the process. hunt 4556 twin peaks goose creek. ten tags are supposed to be available. I put my wife and I both in for it as our first choice. your first link shows there were 3 successful residents and three unsuccessful, and yet still says it was a 1 in 1 draw. my wife and I were both in the unsuccessful category so how in the world is that a 1 in 1 and where did the other tags go? this is my first year in the system so im still learning but that don't make a whole lot of sense. seriously if anyone would care to explain this to me, id be greatly appreciative


Exactly however if you go to the following link it show 1:2.5 odds but according to the guidebook there should of been 10 tags and it is only showing 3 tags.

http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/2015/15_antlerless_points.pdf


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> The discrepancy in tags allocated compared to tags issued on the report is because only the first choice is shown. At least that was the reponse I got last year.
> 
> It would sure be nice on the antlerless and general deer draws to see the 2nd, 3rd choices, etc. although it would be pretty complicated I'm sure.


While that would possibly account for it. It makes no sense to me. A tag drawn is a tag drawn and should be accounted for. Where is the accounting for all these 2nd, 3rd, etc choices? With antlerless it still wipes out your points whether you draw your first or second choice doesn't it? So why would you clump the 2nd, 3rd, etc somewhere else than on the report?


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Seven said:


> While that would possibly account for it. It makes no sense to me. A tag drawn is a tag drawn and should be accounted for. Where is the accounting for all these 2nd, 3rd, etc choices? With antlerless it still wipes out your points whether you draw your first or second choice doesn't it? So why would you clump the 2nd, 3rd, etc somewhere else than on the report?


I agree with you, I'd like to see a report that includes 2nd, 3rd, etc... but fact of the matter is that the response I got was that the data published is for first choice only.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

You will find similar discrepancies for virtually every unit in the report... every unit. Simply because we are not given the data for applicants that drew those tags as one of their other choices. Don't get hurt thinking that it's just "your" unit that shows the tags were shorted in this report because the report is inherently incomplete. 

The unit I applied for had 180 tags approved for residents but only 154 are actually accounted for...


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> You will find similar discrepancies for virtually every unit in the report... every unit. Simply because we are not given the data for applicants that drew those tags as one of their other choices. Don't get hurt thinking that it's just "your" unit that shows the tags were shorted in this report because the report is inherently incomplete.
> 
> The unit I applied for had 180 tags approved for residents but only 154 are actually accounted for...


Thank you for responding.

The thing that made me start looking what the amount of leftover permits this year compared to previous years. There was a whole lot less leftovers. So it must mean that a whole lot more people started using their 2nd and 3rd choices in the draw, where previously they just put their 1st choice. Or was it that we had roughly 6000 more applicants for antlerless elk this year? Maybe a myriad of both.

My fear is that antlerless is becoming more and more of a limited entry hunt.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Seven said:


> My fear is that antlerless is becoming more and more of a limited entry hunt.


Consider this a reality... antlerless deer and pronghorn are already there.

Antlerless deer is insane... I don't apply for any of these hunts but if I started today I'd be looking at about an average of 10 years to draw a tag (75 years or so if I wanted the two doe Junction Valley CWMU). Crazy, for a doe deer. Much of this logjam comes from simply a lack of options, there are so few units available.

Antlerless pronghorn isn't much better... if I started applying today pronghorn also averages about 10 years with the outlier being the North Slope, Summit which comes in at about 40 years. Plateau on the other hand offers so many tags that it can be had every couple of years, so there is a nice mix of "opportunity" and "trophy" (I just felt stupid for typing trophy speaking of antlerless animals).

I haven't put the antlerless elk data in the spreadsheet yet... but for 2014 the average was down around 2 years. If I had zero points right now and was applying there are a handful of units that based on 2014 that would take me 10 years to draw. Now that doesn't actually play out because the highest number of preference points that it takes to draw an antlerless elk tag comes in at 4 and 5 points... but based on the current applicant pool drawing an antlerless elk tag every other year or two is not an unreasonable expectation.


----------



## nelsonccc (Jul 8, 2014)

derekp1999 said:


> Consider this a reality... antlerless deer and pronghorn are already there.
> 
> Antlerless deer is insane... I don't apply for any of these hunts but if I started today I'd be looking at about an average of 10 years to draw a tag (75 years or so if I wanted the two doe Junction Valley CWMU). Crazy, for a doe deer. Much of this logjam comes from simply a lack of options, there are so few units available.
> 
> ...


Looking at your anterless spreadsheet as a non-resident is that data just not there yet? There are non-resident tags allocated for cow hunts but it all shows as NA? I was hoping to see how in the world I didn't draw my anterless cow tag with 2 points.

PS, thanks so much for the work you do! I longingly look at the data almost daily during the app season!


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

Like derek said only first choice is shown on the draw stats. 2nd - 5th is NOT. No tags disappeared and nobody got screwed unless they did it to themselves.

Jmgardner, you and your wife just happened to be 2 of the 3 unlucky applicants. 10 tags were issued, the 7 that are not shown on the stats went to applicants that had 1 or more points and put that hunt down as choice 2-5. The way it worked out in your case is that once the computer went through all the choices(1-5) for applicants with one point there were 2 tags leftover to drop down to the 0 point pool. There were 5 applicants with 0 points that put that hunt as their first choice so 2 got tags and the other 3 were unsuccessful.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

nelsonccc said:


> Looking at your anterless spreadsheet as a non-resident is that data just not there yet? There are non-resident tags allocated for cow hunts but it all shows as NA? I was hoping to see how in the world I didn't draw my anterless cow tag with 2 points.


The antlerless spreadsheet isn't updated yet. I have the deer & pronghorn data all entered but the elk will take me some time because I'm updating it to match the format of the LE/OIAL spreadsheet. I'm also including CWMUs in this one and I'll need to add all that data. I hope to have it updated soon... I'm shooting for the end of the week.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

huntinfanatic said:


> Jmgardner, you and your wife just happened to be 2 of the 3 unlucky applicants. 10 tags were issued, the 7 that are not shown on the stats went to applicants that had 1 or more points and put that hunt down as choice 2-5. The way it worked out in your case is that once the computer went through all the choices(1-5) for applicants with one point there were 2 tags leftover to drop down to the 0 point pool. There were 5 applicants with 0 points that put that hunt as their first choice so 2 got tags and the other 3 were unsuccessful.


This is one of those instances where applying as a group hurt your chances of drawing a tag. In order for you and your wife to draw there had to be a minimum of two tags available. As soon as there was only one tag available your application was thrown out.

Applying as a group has it's advantages and it's disadvantages.


----------



## bugchuker (Dec 3, 2007)

I had 3 cow points and didnt draw Deseret, I thought it would be a sure thing. Now I'll have 4 points that will just be lost as I'll be a Wyoming resident next year and wont need to deal with it. The sad part is I almost had enough bull points to draw a muzzy tag, life goes on.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

bugchuker said:


> I had 3 cow points and didnt draw Deseret, I thought it would be a sure thing. Now I'll have 4 points that will just be lost as I'll be a Wyoming resident next year and wont need to deal with it. The sad part is I almost had enough bull points to draw a muzzy tag, life goes on.


Hey, bugchucker... don't just toss those points aside just yet. There are plenty of public land tags that could easily be had with those points. In fact, there are many units where it is EASIER to draw as a non-resident if you are willing/able to pony up the non-resident tag fee.


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

huntinfanatic said:


> Like derek said only first choice is shown on the draw stats. 2nd - 5th is NOT. No tags disappeared and nobody got screwed unless they did it to themselves.
> 
> Jmgardner, you and your wife just happened to be 2 of the 3 unlucky applicants. 10 tags were issued, the 7 that are not shown on the stats went to applicants that had 1 or more points and put that hunt down as choice 2-5. The way it worked out in your case is that once the computer went through all the choices(1-5) for applicants with one point there were 2 tags leftover to drop down to the 0 point pool. There were 5 applicants with 0 points that put that hunt as their first choice so 2 got tags and the other 3 were unsuccessful.


I thought that antlerless also followed the 50/50 rule. Meaning that 5 of the tags were handed out to the highest point holders and the other 5 would of been handed out in random. So wouldn't the stat show at least 5 tags being allocated? Doesn't first choice supersede someone else's 2nd, 3rd, etc. choice? Or does someone else with more points but puts the hunt down at 2nd,3rd,etc get ahead of the person with 0 points with the hunt as 1st choice. I thought that all 1st choices were gone through and then that is when 2nd,3rd,etc where then handed too?

So if I put in an app and I have 2 points. My app gets assigned the draw number #2. I Put down the hunts as 1st choice hunt #A 2nd choice hunt#B and 3rd choice hunt #c. Then someone else(hunter #2) puts in their app and has 4 points(still not max points in this example) but they get assigned #8 as their draw number. They put Down Hunt #b or c as their 1st choice. I will draw Hunt b or C as my 2nd and 3rd choice before Hunter #2? Draws his 1st choice?

Hopefully that example makes sense(it did in my head, but I am weird).


----------



## Jmgardner (Sep 17, 2014)

seven, I was also under the impression that all 1st choices were went through first. that's why I didn't understand how 7 other non 1st choices beat my first choice. but if that's not the case, that would have been nice to know before hand. but lets be real, who REALLY understands the DWR system? I mean guys who say they've lived here all their life still argue over how it works. but I digress.


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

Jmgardner said:


> seven, I was also under the impression that all 1st choices were went through first. that's why I didn't understand how 7 other non 1st choices beat my first choice. but if that's not the case, that would have been nice to know before hand. but lets be real, who REALLY understands the DWR system? I mean guys who say they've lived here all their life still argue over how it works. but I digress.


I laughed when I read this because it is true.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

There was a thread sometime last summer (I think) that went through the drawing order and process... I'll see if I can track it down.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Even better, here is the official legislation regarding drawing application procedures: http://wildlife.utah.gov/rules-regulations/988-r657-62--drawing-application-procedures.html

Scroll down a ways to the Antlerless Species section.


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> Even better, here is the official legislation regarding drawing application procedures: http://wildlife.utah.gov/rules-regulations/988-r657-62--drawing-application-procedures.html
> 
> Scroll down a ways to the Antlerless Species section.


Thank you for that link. I couldn't find where it talked about how the choices play into the draw.

However in a complete different area, I found out that I don't think I will be putting in for any management hunts since 60% of the tags are reserved to ages that I don't qualify for. I knew they held back some tags for youth but was unaware of the Holdback for Senior hunters.

(ii) 30% of management buck deer permits in each unit are reserved for youth hunters.
(iii) Bonus points shall be used when applying
(iv) Any reserved permits remaining and any youth applicants who were not selected for reserved permits shall be returned to the management buck deer drawing.
(3) Senior
(a) For purposes of this section "senior" means any person 65 years of age or older on the opening day of the management buck deer archery season published in the guidebook of the Wildlife Board for taking big game.
(b) Senior applicants who apply for a management buck deer permit
(i) will automatically be considered in the senior drawing based upon their birth date.
(ii) 30% of management buck deer permits in each unit are reserved for senior hunters.
(iii) Bonus points shall be used when applying.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

See post #37 by elkfromabove in this thread:
http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/100833-preference-point-change-4.html


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> See post #37 by elkfromabove in this thread:
> http://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/100833-preference-point-change-4.html


Thank you for all your responses. Now I am off to figure out what a *preference point group *is.

From what little I can find. If I have 2 antlerless points I am put in a group of others that have 2 antlerless points. within that group the lowest number goes and gets their 1st choice tag if available. It then continues down to the next lowest number for first choice. once first choice is done it then follows the same sequence for choices 2 through 5. after all in my group have been gone through it then moves onto the next group that have 1 antlerless points and resets the process.

I thought that is how it would go for max point hunters but does it also go for the random draw hunters? Is the Random draw hunters all put into the same group or are they also put into bonus point groups? It would almost seem that the Random draw would have to work just the opposite to see the results that we are seeing. Than the Random drawing person with the lowest number would get his 1 through 5 choice before moving on the next lowest number.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

Seven said:


> Thank you for all your responses. Now I am off to figure out what a *preference point group *is.


This is simply a fancy way of describing the total number of applicants with one specific number of preference points. In the results tables you can see the number of applicants that applied with 0 points, the number of applicants with 1 point, and so on... essentially every row on the table is a "preference point pool."



Seven said:


> From what little I can find. If I have 2 antlerless points I am put in a group of others that have 2 antlerless points. within that group the lowest number goes and gets their 1st choice tag if available. It then continues down to the next lowest number for first choice. once first choice is done it then follows the same sequence for choices 2 through 5. after all in my group have been gone through it then moves onto the next group that have 1 antlerless points and resets the process.


Sounds like you got it.



Seven said:


> I thought that is how it would go for max point hunters but does it also go for the random draw hunters? Is the Random draw hunters all put into the same group or are they also put into bonus point groups? It would almost seem that the Random draw would have to work just the opposite to see the results that we are seeing. Than the Random drawing person with the lowest number would get his 1 through 5 choice before moving on the next lowest number.


Remember that Utah uses two separate drawing systems... bonus point and preference point. For the antlerless drawings it's a preference point system. They are very different systems. Does this question refer to the limited entry and once-in-a-lifetime drawing or the antlerless drawing?
You really should poke around on my blog (link in my signature), I don't want to hurt myself by patting myself on the back or get in trouble for blatant self-promotion... but I have received some good feedback saying that the drawing process is described quite well there. Specifically check some of the links on the left sidebar in the Drawing Analysis section.


----------



## Seven (Jan 8, 2009)

derekp1999 said:


> This is simply a fancy way of describing the total number of applicants with one specific number of preference points. In the results tables you can see the number of applicants that applied with 0 points, the number of applicants with 1 point, and so on... essentially every row on the table is a "preference point pool."
> 
> Sounds like you got it.
> 
> ...


That Helps a lot. but is sparks one last question which I answered by looking at your web sight. Thank you for helping me understand it.

Thank you


----------



## huntinfanatic (Aug 3, 2012)

Jmgardner, You are not alone in being confused with how the draw works in Utah. It is by far the hardest to understand compared to every other western state. A few years ago I was hired by one of the top application service providers to be their draw odds statistician. I had to learn the in and outs of every western states draw and how they work. Almost every other state uses one point system for everything. Not Utah, to put it mildly its a cluster f*! Utah uses bonus points for some hunts and preference points for others for the same species(I can't figure out the logic in that decision). You would think preference points would all work the same regardless of species or sex but they do not, on antlerless you lose your points if you draw any choice and on GS deer you only lose your points if you draw your first choice. Utah is also the only state I know of that you can have 4 different types of points for deer(LE bonus points, GS preference points, antlerless preference points, and DH preference points). If you have any questions on the draw feel free to message me, I'd be glad to help in any way i can.


----------



## Jmgardner (Sep 17, 2014)

I really appreciate it fanatic! Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?) I won't be drawing for Utah again. Here for grad school and graduating/leaving in May. I did get the general season archery deer for the cache so I guess the system didn't completely fail me, or I fail it. I'll enjoy my deer hunt and look forward to duck season. There's the real fun!


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

derekp1999 said:


> The antlerless spreadsheet isn't updated yet. I have the deer & pronghorn data all entered but the elk will take me some time because I'm updating it to match the format of the LE/OIAL spreadsheet. I'm also including CWMUs in this one and I'll need to add all that data. I hope to have it updated soon... I'm shooting for the end of the week.


Everything came together a little quicker than I thought... I linked the updated antlerless spreadsheet to my blog last night. Enjoy.


----------



## nelsonccc (Jul 8, 2014)

derekp1999 said:


> Everything came together a little quicker than I thought... I linked the updated antlerless spreadsheet to my blog last night. Enjoy.


Thanks. Just a heads up that the non-resident point column for pronghorn and deer are pulling from the resident point box instead of the non-resident point box. I couldn't figure out why the percentages stayed the same on pronghorn no matter how many points I put in!

Easy enough for me to fix on my end but you may want to fix on your website. The elk one is correct and a big thanks for your hard work. If I get ambitious I'll try to take yours and modify it to reflect Nevada.


----------



## nelsonccc (Jul 8, 2014)

Actually I think the elk non-resident is incorrect too. The resident is right but on the non-resident side instead of pulling from the 'Projected Preference Point' column it pulls from the 2012 point column as if you forgot to re-assign those cells after adding in the 2010-2015 data? Not entirely positive since this level of spreadsheet is far beyond what I normally due but by comparing the resident t0 the non-resident I can find the differences. After fixing that it seems to run correct since with 2 cow elk points I should be pretty much 99% across the board for a tag.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

nelsonccc said:


> Thanks. Just a heads up that the non-resident point column for pronghorn and deer are pulling from the resident point box instead of the non-resident point box. I couldn't figure out why the percentages stayed the same on pronghorn no matter how many points I put in!
> 
> Easy enough for me to fix on my end but you may want to fix on your website. The elk one is correct and a big thanks for your hard work. If I get ambitious I'll try to take yours and modify it to reflect Nevada.





nelsonccc said:


> Actually I think the elk non-resident is incorrect too. The resident is right but on the non-resident side instead of pulling from the 'Projected Preference Point' column it pulls from the 2012 point column as if you forgot to re-assign those cells after adding in the 2010-2015 data? Not entirely positive since this level of spreadsheet is far beyond what I normally due but by comparing the resident t0 the non-resident I can find the differences. After fixing that it seems to run correct since with 2 cow elk points I should be pretty much 99% across the board for a tag.


There are a number of errors actually, it looks like I pulled from an older version and just began plugging in the data from the reports. The calculations are not correct. The formula used to calculate the percentages is one that I used early on and is similar to the bonus point formula. Short of it is... IT"S WRONG.

I've made wholesale updates to the right version and I'll have that linked over to my blog later tonight.


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

derekp1999 said:


> There are a number of errors actually, it looks like I pulled from an older version and just began plugging in the data from the reports. The calculations are not correct. The formula used to calculate the percentages is one that I used early on and is similar to the bonus point formula. Short of it is... IT"S WRONG.
> 
> I've made wholesale updates to the right version and I'll have that linked over to my blog later tonight.


How embarrassing... no doubt my credibility will take a hit for that!
It should be all set and linked up there now.


----------



## nelsonccc (Jul 8, 2014)

It shouldn't! Your spreadsheet is great and a big help. Thanks.


----------

