# Who has the most Utah points?



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

I thought this would be fun

Log onto the DWR website where you can check your points:
https://www.utah-hunt.com/UT_returncard/(S(k5shauwpyfbqpvmxhn4t13rd))/default.aspx

Add up all the total number of points you have and let's see who has given the DWR the most $ with no tags to show for it! Sounds fun huh :grin:

In order to have UWN 'Cred' you need to post a screenshot or photo or whatever of your points (no personal info). There will be no catfishing on a thread I start--I want some proof!

*I am sitting on 66 wonderful Points*

You will have to excuse my 11 Antlerless deer points--by now it's kind of a joke when I buy them each year. I may cash them in when my kids can join me and we can all whack and stack em!

So how many points do you have?


----------



## Ray (May 10, 2018)

Holy crap you’ve got a lot of points! You need to cash in on some of those.

My only question is, why on earth do you have 11 antlerless deer points?!

I have 16, I don’t let my points build up, I put in for what I have the best odds of drawing. It makes it harder but I honestly love learning new areas.


----------



## Hunttilidrop (Jun 12, 2018)

39 pts here. 14 moose. I expect to have 34 moose pts by retirement age then I can go hunt. Hoping to draw another le elk tag and a buck tag before then


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

I’ve got 50. My highest at 14 for cow moose, next highest is 13 for mtn goat


----------



## Jedidiah (Oct 10, 2014)

I'll post mine the day after my first back surgery or my retirement, whichever comes first. Til then I'll be happy with sleeping through the night without having to go pee and not having to search around for my bifocals every morning.:grin:


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

I’ve got 24. Since 2015, I’ve burned up 27 points for different tags.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

51 points here

Cashed in 
14 LE elk points in 2016, 
1 turkey point in 2015 
6 antlerless deer points in 2015
6 doe pronghorn points in 2015
2 cow elk points in 2015
10 bison points in 2012

Praise Cthulhu I don't have to rely on points anymore to get good hunting tags each year!

In the three years I've applied in the Alaska draw I've pulled a good caribou tag the first year, great mountain goat tag in year 2 (still salty about that soup), and an any bison tag this year (T-21 days!) #RandomDraw4Evah #PointsR4Pansies


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

I'm at 36 points. I'm not even in the running. 

But I have had:

LE ELK
LE DEER
LE ANTELOPE 
LE BEAR
LE COUGAR
COW ELK TAGS
DREW LE BISON, BUT TURNED IT BACK. 

So........I'm not complaining.


----------



## Size Matters (Dec 22, 2007)

41 points for me.


----------



## olibooger (Feb 13, 2019)

I have so many it hurts to count them 🤣🤯


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I have two neighbors within 4 houses of me who's wifes sit on the top tier of LE Elk points. Neither wife hunts... lol

PS: The high points holder will be a NR applicant, they can build up points for all LE and OIL species at the same time.


-DallanC


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

43. 

My highest point count for 1 species is 5 points (turkey). I hoard points for everything, even those species I currently have no interest in hunting. If we bring other states into the picture, I have 86 points total.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

47 for me. I drew LE Elk 3 years ago with 11 points. One of these days I need to figure out what to do with the Bear points.



-DallanC


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

96 points with one more cougar point on the way but I'd rather have more trophy's on the wall than title of most points.


----------



## Ray (May 10, 2018)

Johnny, You’re a jerk. 😂

Looks like Dallan will probably get a bull moose tag next year. What unit are you going for?


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Man I only have 14. I guess trying to hunt as much as possiable instead of buildings points. And I love tag soup as long as I get to play


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

50 total. 

Dang. That’s depressing.


----------



## scott_rn (Sep 11, 2007)

I think I have 2 points. I wish I had the utah lifetime license like longbow.


----------



## legacy (Sep 30, 2007)

63 if my addition is accurate...


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Glad this isn't something I'm leading the pack in. Drawing tags is more fun than collecting points, that's for sure.









Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ray (May 10, 2018)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Glad this isn't something I'm leading the pack in. Drawing tags is more fun than collecting points.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What unit did you draw that bison tag and how many points did you have?


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Ray said:


> What unit did you draw that bison tag and how many points did you have?


I cashed my points out for a cow tag on the bookcliffs 16 points









Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## yak4fish (Nov 16, 2007)

I have 60 non resident
Points


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

legacy said:


> 63 if my addition is accurate...


I just checked the draw odds for you and looks like next year you could possibly draw a turkey tag lol

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Jedidiah said:


> I'll post mine the day after my first back surgery or my retirement, whichever comes first. Til then I'll be happy with sleeping through the night without having to go pee and not having to search around for my bifocals every morning.:grin:


That's something somebody with low 'cred' And 'points' would say.

My age still begins with a '3'. Some of us 'old' guys ain't that old :grin:


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

flinger said:


> 96 points with one more cougar point on the way but I'd rather have more trophy's on the wall than title of most points.


Pics or it didn't happen folks! :grin:


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

Nice buffalo weaver! Very cool!


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Airborne said:


> I thought this would be fun
> 
> Log onto the DWR website where you can check your points:
> https://www.utah-hunt.com/UT_returncard/(S(k5shauwpyfbqpvmxhn4t13rd))/default.aspx
> ...


Sounds like fun? Kind of depressing to me!


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

According to my calculator, I have 109 total. If I understood how things worked back in 1999 when I was young and dumb (now just "middle aged" and dumb), I would be able to pull some pretty good tags now...


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

High Desert Elk said:


> According to my calculator, I have 109 total. If I understood how things worked back in 1999 when I was young and dumb (now just "middle aged" and dumb), I would be able to pull some pretty good tags now...


Yikes! And High Desert takes the lead! That's even more depressing if you are a resident!


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

I only have 14. I'm not sure if it is a slap at my cred or a good thing. 

I think I'm with Ridgetop that these high numbers would be grounds for some level of depression.


----------



## headbones (Sep 7, 2019)

CPAjeff said:


> I've got 24. Since 2015, I've burned up 27 points for different tags.


You would have had 18 points for Once in a Life time species if you hadn't of jumped around! Its ok I have a couple different ones also. Good luck. JW


----------



## Aznative (May 25, 2018)

Okay educate me guys. In my home state you could either buy one pt a species per year if say you werent going to hunt that year but wanted to keep bonus points rolling over. Or if you didnt get drawn you received one bonus point. Is this the same here or can you purchase more than one point per species a year? Thanks still learning some stuff. And yes I know i need to read the fine print regs but saw this post and wanted to ask. Thanks guys


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

headbones said:


> You would have had 18 points for Once in a Life time species if you hadn't of jumped around! Its ok I have a couple different ones also. Good luck. JW


I'm not sure I follow your math ... combining all the OIAL big game animals I'd have 15. Plus, I'm not quite old enough to have 18 years of applying.

I wasn't interested in big game hunting until my late teens and I've spent a few years outside the state as Utah, as such, I could apply for all species every year as a nonresident.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Aznative said:


> Okay educate me guys. In my home state you could either buy one pt a species per year if say you werent going to hunt that year but wanted to keep bonus points rolling over. Or if you didnt get drawn you received one bonus point. Is this the same here or can you purchase more than one point per species a year? Thanks still learning some stuff. And yes I know i need to read the fine print regs but saw this post and wanted to ask. Thanks guys


For residents in the big game drawing, you can apply for:

1 species for OIAL (desert sheep, rocky mtn sheep, mountain goat, moose, or bison)

1 species for LE/CWMU (deer, elk, or antelope)

GS deer

As a nonresident, a person could apply for all OIAL species, all LE species, and GS deer.


----------



## Aznative (May 25, 2018)

CPAjeff said:


> Aznative said:
> 
> 
> > Okay educate me guys. In my home state you could either buy one pt a species per year if say you werent going to hunt that year but wanted to keep bonus points rolling over. Or if you didnt get drawn you received one bonus point. Is this the same here or can you purchase more than one point per species a year? Thanks still learning some stuff. And yes I know i need to read the fine print regs but saw this post and wanted to ask. Thanks guys
> ...


Thanks ive read up on those parts as this year was first putting in. Just seemed like some have tons of points. I guess the draw odds are alot harder up her. I do wish Utah would change the LE rules of one species. I get its made for making odds better for everyone as a whole but example im always going to put in LE elk but would sure like to put in for antelope and LE deer too. I guess one way is to just buy a LE point for elk one year while putting in LE deer that year? I will read up on it. Just seems odd. AZ was for dummies like me no LE or premium etc etc. It was just early archery bull or esrly muzzleload then a late rifle bull etc. However you guys have schooled me here. I thought hunting in AZ was popular. Omg up here is another level.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Aznative said:


> I guess one way is to just buy a LE point for elk one year while putting in LE deer that year?


If you apply for LE elk, you cannot purchase a point for LE deer or LE antelope that same year. One LE application for either elk, deer, or antelope per year.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Ya'll would do a lot more hunting and a lot less point collecting if we had a full random draw :mrgreen:


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Ya'll would do a lot more hunting and a lot less point collecting if we had a full random draw :mrgreen:


*maybe


----------



## Aznative (May 25, 2018)

Crazy im so use to putting in for everything each year. But i guess putting in out of state too can help some odds.


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

You guys with LE elk, deer and antelope points, great strategy, keep it up.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

blackdog said:


> You guys with LE elk, deer and antelope points, great strategy, keep it up.


No buck hunting since the rule change?


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

blackdog said:


> You guys with LE elk, deer and antelope points, great strategy, keep it up.


Yep, and in only 10 more years I'll have as many max NR points as everyone else in my pool, so I might as well start applying for real now instead of just buying points. I actually have better odds now to draw coveted tags in UT than anything in my home state...



CPAjeff said:


> As a nonresident, a person could apply for all OIAL species, all LE species, and GS deer.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

blackdog said:


> You guys with LE elk, deer and antelope points, great strategy, keep it up.


As long as I can buy points for all the species as the same time, you betcha I'm gonna!


----------



## BruinPoint (Mar 22, 2010)

I'm in the 100+ point club too...









Find me on Instagram @970outdoors


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I currently stand at 27
LE Deer............................. 2
Antler-less Dee ................. 2
GS Buck Deer ................... 1
LE Elk............................... 10
Cow Elk............................ 2
Mountain Goat .................. 10

I already drew LE deer and LE Elk the following year and ate tag soup on both. I was not really prepared to hunt those years. I had a lot of crap going on and I ever thought I'd draw and alas, I did. I should have turned in both tags.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Well here's mine.



Hunt Description Points Year of Last Point Year of LastPermit Harvest Survey Entered Year Eligible Reason (If Ineligble) 





Turkey - 3 


Limited Entry Buck Deer - 11 


General Season Buck Deer - 2 


 Limited Entry BuckPronghorn - 6 


Limited Entry Bull Elk - 2 


Desert Bighorn Sheep - 9 


Bull Moose - 1


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I've got 48. 

Bison - 17
Antlerless moose - 12
LE Elk - 6
LE Deer - 6
Doe Antelope, antlerless elk - 2
Goat, DH, Turkey - 1



My 15 year old daughter has 14 total points. She'll probably pull a bull elk tag before me!


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

66 unless my math is wrong


----------



## callofthewild (Sep 7, 2007)

i must be one of the lucky ones.

1 - turkey
1- le buck deer
1 - gs dear
1 - dedicated hunter
3 - buck pronghorn
3- le bull elk
20 - bison


----------



## muleydeermaniac (Jan 17, 2008)

Sittin on 32.
I have good luck with antlerless draws and draw about every other year. I have drawn a CWMU bull elk as well, about 8 years ago. Most of my points sit on a moose tag sometime before the millennium.


----------



## gander311 (Dec 23, 2008)

42 currently for me, with my highest being 20 on Bison, and 17 on LE elk. 

I just cashed in 6 points for LE spring turkey (and then ate tag soup) and 3 for a swan for this winter, so I was above 50 a few months ago.


It's been so long on bison and elk, that I'm now scared for the day when I finally do draw. Too much pressure after 2 decades...


----------



## callofthewild (Sep 7, 2007)

gander311 said:


> 42 currently for me, with my highest being 20 on Bison, and 17 on LE elk.
> 
> I just cashed in 6 points for LE spring turkey (and then ate tag soup) and 3 for a swan for this winter, so I was above 50 a few months ago.
> 
> It's been so long on bison and elk, that I'm now scared for the day when I finally do draw. Too much pressure after 2 decades...


heck yeah i was 25 when i started putting in for bison. when and if ever i draw that tag, the pressure is going to be too much. who wants to buy my points? i will just go to a bison ranch in montana and shoot one of the beasts. could have done it by now with the entry fees x 20.


----------



## blackdog (Sep 11, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> No buck hunting since the rule change?


Not in Utah.


----------



## american_jackal (Mar 1, 2017)

29pts here. 16 for elk, and 9 for rocky, are my largest allotments.


----------



## twall13 (Aug 2, 2015)

45 points here. Hopefully I can draw my OIL, I mean, LE Elk tag in the next few years. I'm still a long ways out on OIL Bull moose. I've been building up a few antlerless points lately hoping to help the odds when my kids get a bit older.









Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## guner (Sep 25, 2007)

Well I have 18 LE Elk and only like 6 points in everything else and 3 Turkey

Of my 18 Elk, I put it 14 years straight for Conover/Jenson CWMU and last 3 for Manti don’t remember where my first year. I know I missed a year or two in the beginning, so I started entering in my late 20’s and I’m 48 now I’m getting to the point now where I’m putting in almost out of spite ! 😈


----------



## naturalist (Aug 20, 2011)

Looks like I have 49 points -


----------



## Hunttilidrop (Jun 12, 2018)

Naturalist! 27 LE elk points!😳 When you going hunting??


----------



## naturalist (Aug 20, 2011)

Hunttilidrop, I hope to use the elk points in the next four or five years. Early on I used to put in for Deseret and later Pahvant and San Juan. Seems like those units aren't what they used to be so I'm not sure where to apply. Been sort of treading water by buying points the last three years. I'm well past my physical peak so I'll probably end up hiring a guide on one of the better units in the near future.


----------



## NH Hunter (Feb 4, 2008)

I've only got 18 pts but they're all LE Elk. I'm a NR and I'm looking for a muzzy bull tag, probably Book Cliffs. I'm getting close to max points and have actually been putting in for the tag now. For years I just collected points. I started buying points in 1995 after talking with a guy who scored on a nice bull in the Wasatch unit. I missed the deadline a couple times or would have been the max points guy by now. Hell, I don't even live in NH any more.  I should draw in the next few years. This will end up being a OIL tag for me. I won't be around long enough to gather enough LE points for another one. The whole game has changed a lot since 1995.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

NH Hunter said:


> I've only got 18 pts but they're all LE Elk. I'm a NR and I'm looking for a muzzy bull tag, probably Book Cliffs. I'm getting close to max points and have actually been putting in for the tag now. For years I just collected points. I started buying points in 1995 after talking with a guy who scored on a nice bull in the Wasatch unit. I missed the deadline a couple times or would have been the max points guy by now. Hell, I don't even live in NH any more.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Here is a perfect example of why people dont understand the point creep.

Yes, 18 points is close.
But there where/are 7 guys in that pool going after 1 bonus permit.

The problem, just like this year,
Some guy with 20+ points jumps in and gets the permit.

This is going to happen for a long time. A guy with 18 right now might nor draw the BC muzzy tag for 20 years.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

goofy elk said:


> Here is a perfect example of why people dont understand the point creep.
> 
> Yes, 18 points is close.
> But there where/are 7 guys in that pool going after 1 bonus permit.
> ...


Full Random!!!

This thread is depressing. And goofy, the same thing happens with Moose. Trying to explain to somebody who has put in for two decades that he still could die without a tag is difficult. Many times I take the "smile and wave" approach.


----------



## NH Hunter (Feb 4, 2008)

*Point Creep*

No delusions here. Just because I'm close doesn't mean I'll draw soon. It means my odds are generally getting better. I have been tracking the max points successful draw for that unit for years. I actually track it on a spreadsheet so I don't have to remember or look up my points for planning purposes. For each year of the draw, I keep track of the number of people ahead of me in point count and the number of people tied with me. Last year ( 2018 ) it was one ahead and five tied. After this years draw, it was zero ahead and six tied (someone else jumped in). In 2011 I would have had a 33% odds of drawing as there were zero applicants ahead and two tied. I didn't apply for the tag that year but those were the odds, based on points. I had hoped that the requirement to purchase a license to apply for points would reduce the number of NR points collectors. Hard to say if it did. I just know a point costs more today than it used to. The numbers change every year. Nothing I can do about that. There is a random draw tag available, too. Odds are long on that one. If I didn't miss those few deadline dates, I'd be the max points guy. Shame on me. I think the number of points required somewhat reflects the quality of the unit/hunt. Those change too, over time. I understand point creep very well. I stopped the point banking game in CO for a bunch of reasons. There are MZ tags in CO that require so many points to draw I would never consider it. I wouldn't hunt those units if it was two points. I'll be hunting an OTC 2nd season bull in CO again this year. Good luck to all those headed out in the field this year. Be safe.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Full Random!!!
> 
> This thread is depressing. And goofy, the same thing happens with Moose. Trying to explain to somebody who has put in for two decades that he still could die without a tag is difficult. Many times I take the "smile and wave" approach.


I second the motion. I've been saying this for a long time.

Forget trying to explain it to someone with 20 points; try saying it to your 0 point grand-kid with a straight face. I believe point creep is a huge factor in the decline of new hunter recruitment.

and now...... :focus:


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

MadHunter said:


> I second the motion. I've been saying this for a long time.


Hell no. I have friends in other states that have never drawn a single thing, ever. They come to Utah to hunt.



> Forget trying to explain it to someone with 20 points; try saying it to your 0 point grand-kid with a straight face.


You mean the kid that gets to use grandpa's 20 points on a tag he gets to use (mentor system) ??? The kid that can apply for youth only tags and have a great chance to draw?



> I believe point creep is a huge factor in the decline of new hunter recruitment.


I'm pretty sure that is not true.

https://www.standard.net/despite-na...cle_63aacad8-ec13-5846-850f-61f586eb67c8.html

Most hunters don't give crap about big game, the vast majority of hunters were small game hunters, with big game hunters being a subset of that.

#1 factor is loss of small game habitat. Draws only affect big game. Most hunters got into hunting through small game: Rabbits, Pheasants, Dove, Grouse, waterfowl etc etc.

Just to shoot at a rabbit takes how long of a drive now? We've shot peasants literally out the window of our house growing up. Those days are gone, too many houses, too many developments. Loss of habitat = loss of animals to hunt.

-DallanC


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

^^^^^^ what Dallan said! ^^^^^^

X10


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Hell no. I have friends in other states that have never drawn a single thing, ever. They come to Utah to hunt.


Only states without a point system would be ID and NM. Everyone in those random draw states has an equitable system that gives them all an equal chance of drawing a tag. If they haven't draw you can chalk that up as bad luck.



DallanC said:


> You mean the kid that gets to use grandpa's 20 points on a tag he gets to use (mentor system) ??? The kid that can apply for youth only tags and have a great chance to draw?


The mentor system is a way of throwing a worse policy on top of a bad policy. It should be done away with completely. As far as the youth tag goes; these tags are a revenue stream, period. I can't find any actual harvest/success data for it but the DWR does state it is a very low success rate hunt.



DallanC said:


> I'm pretty sure that is not true.
> 
> https://www.standard.net/despite-na...cle_63aacad8-ec13-5846-850f-61f586eb67c8.html
> 
> ...


I guess this last point is debatable but hunter recruitment is a problem we face. Although we are more hunters in numbers we are less as a percentage of the population and will continue to decline. Sad reality.

Talk about a thread hijack.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

DallanC said:


> Hell no. I have friends in other states that have never drawn a single thing, ever. They come to Utah to hunt.
> 
> You mean the kid that gets to use grandpa's 20 points on a tag he gets to use (mentor system) ??? The kid that can apply for youth only tags and have a great chance to draw?
> 
> ...


I'm highly doubtful small game hunting numbers are increasing, having your dad buy you a license to buy big game points doesn't put boots in the field.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> Hell no. I have friends in other states that have never drawn a single thing, ever. They come to Utah to hunt.


I have friends who draw things every year. Ask Johnny how his draws are going.

In Wyoming my buddy drew a trophy elk tag 2x in 3 seasons. They aren't even the traditional full random either. I think there are a few benefits. One is you don't become tied to points for certain units, or even tied to a certain species.

There are a TON of variables that go into each state. Habitat, animal population, and number of applicants all impact Utah (and others). Every other state is reducing their non res tags and increasing their costs.

For habitat, huntable area, and populations -- Lots could be done in Utah that happens in other states. SFW could use the $20+ Million they have gotten from the expo to buy a nice chunk of ground to secure for wildlife management and hunting, like RMEF does. They could use that money to gain access to land-locked public ground like RMEF does. They don't. We also continue to destroy wintering ground with homes.

So with our supply low and demand high, the waiting in line method will continue to be worse and worse. Full random at least gives hope, and doesn't tie people down with false dreams - even the guy with 18 - 22 points doesn't understand what he is up against.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Random draw...not only no, but hell no. It is not even a debatable subject to me. I have drawn an LE elk tag with one point, an LE deer tag (pauns) with one point, and LE antelope with zero points. Sorry, but I always have hope of drawing with the current system.

When I was involved with completely random draws--the old AR301 and Wyoming, I never drew a thing. I like things the way they are.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> I have friends who draw things every year. Ask Johnny how his draws are going.
> 
> In Wyoming my buddy drew a trophy elk tag 2x in 3 seasons. They aren't even the traditional full random either. I think there are a few benefits. One is you don't become tied to points for certain units, or even tied to a certain species.
> 
> ...


These 2 points are key. Can't say it better or with more clarity.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

MadHunter said:


> Only states without a point system would be ID and NM. Everyone in those random draw states has an equitable system that gives them all an equal chance of drawing a tag. If they haven't draw you can chalk that up as bad luck.
> 
> .


And Alaska  I LOVE the full random draw--no sense of entitlement or perceived financial investment. No moving end zones. No worry about having to pony up the $ to apply for a point so you don't fall behind, even though you know you won't be able to hunt that tag if you drew it that year. Just a straight, honest everybody has the same odds. It is fantastic.

I never drew ANY tag in Utah without having "max points" for that hunt--even the cow bison tag I got called for in 2012 after they last minute added ~60 tags, if you run the numbers as if those tags were available in the original draw I had 2 "extra" points that year to be in the bonus pool.

Yes, 50% of the tags in Utah are still more or less random draw (but with more points you have more opportunities for a winning number). But that 50% reserved creates a lot of issues.

I figure at this point I'll have an obscene amount of total UT points before I ever draw another UT tag, but gosh darn it I can't seem to overcome my sunk cost fallacy problems!


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

goofy elk said:


> Here is a perfect example of why people dont understand the point creep.
> 
> Yes, 18 points is close.
> But there where/are 7 guys in that pool going after 1 bonus permit.
> ...


At this point, I am sure that Point Creep causes cancer.

Point creep can mean someone jumping into a hunting pool with more points than you and pulling a tag. Which is kind of funny to me, because this can happen in a lottery drawing. Someone can hop in the random draw and take a tag that you thought you had on lock. 21 applicants for 20 permits is a prime example of this, if that person did not put in then you would have drawn.

Point creep can also mean a gradual increase at the minimum point levels. Units that took 2 points, now take 3 or 4 points to draw. To me this is no different than a lottery system when more people put in for the draw. More people want a specific permit, so the probability of drawing goes down.

It boils down to more people wanting to hunt than the availability of the resource. Which is an interesting topic, especially when hunter recruitment is at an low. Idaho sold out, Montana can sell out, Wyoming left overs are not so much leftovers anymore. Colorado/New Mexico/Arizona etc are all having more people apply for permits or attempting to pick up permits due to an increase in western hunting. Weather is it the digital marketing, forums, word of mouth, or another form of information gathering, people have figured out that hunting in the western US is extremely do-able. In most cases these people are the ones funding wildlife and not the residents.

In Utah has a 50% points to lottery system, which is a really good points system. Colorado 100% points and Wyoming 75% points, would be more of an issue with the accumulation of points. Even in Lottery states like Idaho and New Mexico, the issue is more people applying than every before.

So, I guess my point is that point creep is just an excuse for not drawing and is really no different than the excuses that you hear in the lottery states. (They give them all to non residents, things would be different with a points system, etc).

It is just people frustrated at an issue that they really do not understand the root cause of.

The root cause of not drawing is more applicants than the available tags. It is no different in a lottery than in a points system. Too many people are wanting to hunt in certain areas.

/EndRant


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> At this point, I am sure that Point Creep causes cancer.
> 
> Point creep can mean someone jumping into a hunting pool with more points than you and pulling a tag. Which is kind of funny to me, because this can happen in a lottery drawing. Someone can hop in the random draw and take a tag that you thought you had on lock. 21 applicants for 20 permits is a prime example of this, if that person did not put in then you would have drawn.
> 
> ...


Utah doesn't have a true 50% system. First thing the board likes to keep the tags at a odd number to cheat the non residents and random draw applicants out of a tag. Also if there are more top point holders then tags they are then entered into the random draw. Essentially getting entered twice for the same tag giving them a more than 50% advantage.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> At this point, I am sure that Point Creep causes cancer.
> 
> Point creep can mean someone jumping into a hunting pool with more points than you and pulling a tag. Which is kind of funny to me, because this can happen in a lottery drawing. Someone can hop in the random draw and take a tag that you thought you had on lock. 21 applicants for 20 permits is a prime example of this, if that person did not put in then you would have drawn.


I get your example, more tags than applicants so it's a lock, but it's flawed because you can't show me a hunt that has that situation. Thinking you have a lock on any draw is like thinking can flip a coin and be certain what it fall on 100% of the time.



MuscleWhitefish said:


> Point creep can also mean a gradual increase at the minimum point levels. Units that took 2 points, now take 3 or 4 points to draw. To me this is no different than a lottery system when more people put in for the draw. More people want a specific permit, so the probability of drawing goes down.


I gather from this statement that you don't understand the point system or random draw. The odds drop exponentially over time in the point system, whereas the odds of a random draw are only affected by the number of applicants vs tags available and nothing else.



MuscleWhitefish said:


> It boils down to more people wanting to hunt than the availability of the resource. Which is an interesting topic, especially when hunter recruitment is at an low. Idaho sold out, Montana can sell out, Wyoming left overs are not so much leftovers anymore. Colorado/New Mexico/Arizona etc are all having more people apply for permits or attempting to pick up permits due to an increase in western hunting. Weather is it the digital marketing, forums, word of mouth, or another form of information gathering, people have figured out that hunting in the western US is extremely do-able. In most cases these people are the ones funding wildlife and not the residents.
> 
> In Utah has a 50% points to lottery system, which is a really good points system. Colorado 100% points and Wyoming 75% points, would be more of an issue with the accumulation of points. Even in Lottery states like Idaho and New Mexico, the issue is more people applying than every before.


50% of tags go to the max point holders, true. The odds of drawing the other 50 percent are skewed by the increased entries of those with max -1 and max -2 and so on. So it doesn't just stop at the the top.



MuscleWhitefish said:


> So, I guess my point is that point creep is just an excuse for not drawing and is really no different than the excuses that you hear in the lottery states. (They give them all to non residents, things would be different with a points system, etc).
> 
> It is just people frustrated at an issue that they really do not understand the root cause of.
> 
> ...


Point creep is not an excuse for not drawing, it is a reason. The frustration of people comes from not understanding not only one system or the other but the differences between the two. Unfortunately, implementing the point system created a sense of entitlement that is now creating even more frustration and like a bureaucracy, you can't get rid of it.

The last statement I marked in red reaffirms my belief that you do not understand how either system works nor the idiosyncrasies of the odds and probabilities that come with them.

FULL RANDOM DRAW!!!!!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I'll take the entitlement system...those who have been putting in the longest should have the highest odds.

A full random draw sucks...


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> I get your example, more tags than applicants so it's a lock, but it's flawed because you can't show me a hunt that has that situation.


Sure he could. Utah has these every year...hence, the leftover tags going on sale. True, these tags are not LE tags, but they are leftover permits and they do apply to the point being made.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> I'll take the entitlement system...those who have been putting in the longest should have the highest odds.
> 
> A full random draw sucks...


Entitlement is definitely the mentality. Same guys cried when they changed the deer drawing-- hey should of known the rules -- same guys buying points for the wife and grandma to mentor the kids, hey they deserve to move to the front of the line.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Entitlement is definitely the mentality. Same guys cried when they changed the deer drawing-- hey should of known the rules -- same guys buying points for the wife and grandma to mentor the kids, hey they deserve to move to the front of the line.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


Yep, totally agree. The guys who have been putting in the longest should be entitled to greater odds than those who have not been putting in long.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> Sure he could. Utah has these every year...hence, the leftover tags going on sale. True, these tags are not LE tags, but they are leftover permits and they do apply to the point being made.


Wrong. The left over tags are not part of the bonus point system that causes creep they are part of the General season preference point system that only gives you an additional name in the hat per point. They are also let over in areas of low deer population and where the vast majority of the land is private.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> Yep, totally agree. The guys who have been putting in the longest should be entitled to greater odds than those who have not been putting in long.


Sure why not not? By that logic I should be due to the power ball and mega millions any day now.

It's a failed attempt to create fairness where none was needed and it ended up in a pyramid scheme that those at the top don't want to give up.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Wrong. The left over tags are not part of the bonus point system that causes creep they are part of the General season preference point system that only gives you an additional name in the hat per point. They are also let over in areas of low deer population and where the vast majority of the land is private.


Uhhh...isn't that what I said--that they were not LE tags and not part of the bonus point system? But, they still apply to the point being made. They are undersubscribed draw permits. IN other words, more tags than applicants. So, right now I might think I have a lock for putting in for one of those permits next year...but, if some other hunters jump into that draw, I still may not draw that permit. The point that was made still stands.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

MadHunter said:


> I get your example, more tags than applicants so it's a lock, but it's flawed because you can't show me a hunt that has that situation. Thinking you have a lock on any draw is like thinking can flip a coin and be certain what it fall on 100% of the time.
> 
> *I actually can show you a hunt where that happened. I was the guy that switched units in a random draw and one person was left out in the dark, because I switched. Unit 1 Sandhill Crane. 25 Applicants for 24 Tags https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Hunting/Drawing Odds/DRAW_EC_RES_2016.pdf
> *
> ...


I do not think that you are seeing the bigger picture. Your draw odds would still be awful with a lottery. There are too many people applying for the number of tags and going with a full random draw will not fix that problem. It will only toss the excuse can down the road.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Sure why not not?


Why not? Because those who have been putting in the longest are entitled to better odds than those who have only just begun putting in.

You've been putting in for the power ball and mega millions a long time now? That is just as dumb as putting in for a random draw lottery tag; you make a good point--they should start giving bonus points to people who keep buying the lottery tickets. I bet that would bring all kinds of extra money for lottery states...good idea.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I'm getting really good at turning any draw/point conversations into one's about FULL RANDOM DRAWS

One of the threads in the past, well some amount of time, one of our resident data dudes crunched the numbers and on most hunts, majority of the pools odds increased on full random. Aside from the tippy top. Which as time goes, if you look at the pools (demand) vs tags (supply) are becoming a round bulging mountain top, rather than a peak (which is why creep expands multiple years, these groups are larger and larger). So, that will only further drive the odds for other groups if we moved full random and get to the point that the top pool will always have worse odds than 1:1.


If that didn't make sense, I don't care. Full freaking Random!


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I do not think that you are seeing the bigger picture. Your draw odds would still be awful with a lottery. There are too many people applying for the number of tags and going with a full random draw will not fix that problem. It will only toss the excuse can down the road.


I don't think you see the big picture. Full random is not dependant on who or who doesn't apply or the past draw results it's the same for every application every single year. What gets kicked down the road except entitlement?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## NH Hunter (Feb 4, 2008)

*Bonus points*

NH Moose tag lottery was a bonus point system. Random draw, but for every year you applied, your name went into the hat again. Pretty fair. People who put in the longest had a better odds of drawing, but everyone had a chance. You had to rank your units in order of preference and if you didn't want to hunt in a particular unit, you didn't put it on your app. I drew an either sex moose tag after putting in for about 10 years. Probably the only reason I drew that quickly is that I included the lowest success rate unit in the state on my application. Many people wouldn't even put it on their app. If I held out for one of the slam dunk units up north it probably would've taken a lot longer..... but maybe not. Theoretically, you could draw one of those primo units with no bonus points.

I wonder how many people die while sitting on 20+ points w/o drawing.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Too bad the full random draw guys either weren't born yet or too young to to make much noise when the current system was put in place.
Hind sight may be 20/20 but when the current plan was put in place it sounded very good to most of us at the time.
I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few max point holders and high point holders don't put in to draw just to irritate you guys


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

middlefork said:


> Too bad the full random draw guys either weren't born yet or too young to to make much noise when the current system was put in place.
> Hind sight may be 20/20 but when the current plan was put in place it sounded very good to most of us at the time.
> I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few max point holders and high point holders don't put in to draw just to irritate you guys


A lot of us were around before the point system was put in place. Heck I remember buying a deer tag and being able to hunt anywhere in the state and all 3 weapon seasons.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada has the best point system out there, IMO. They "square" your points and then add one more for the current year, and you get that many chances in the draw. No permits are reserved for top point holders.

The guy with 25 points gets 25 * 25 + 1 = 626 chances to draw.

I with my 4 points get 4 * 4 + 1 = 17 chances to draw.

Not a bad deal. People who have invested the longest get a better chance, but ANYONE can draw ANY tag. That's my main complaint about Utah's system: We reserve half the tags for a tiny minority of people, many of whom are at a privileged position that no new hunter can ever dream of reaching (until he's really old, at best).

I'll acknowledge that it works ok for some of the hunts (like LE archery elk, LE pronghorn), but it's downright stupid for most of the OIAL tags and the high-demand LE tags. We have units in Utah where people with 22 points have a 50% chance of drawing, and people with 21 points have a 2% or less chance of drawing. IMO that doesn't make too much sense. Why give that much privilege to a guy that happened to be born one year sooner?

TOTP


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Clarq said:


> Nevada has the best point system out there, IMO. They "square" your points and then add one more for the current year, and you get that many chances in the draw. No permits are reserved for top point holders.
> 
> The guy with 25 points gets 25 * 25 + 1 = 626 chances to draw.
> 
> ...


I know your a numbers guy but I'm going to have to disagree that the squared points system is best. How is 27 years vs 1 crunch out? Now add everyone entries up and the sheer numbers put the odds a lot lower than Utah's current system. I'd much rather have Utah's current system then give my children that.

I'd happily go to an entry for every year you waited plus one for the current year. Gives an advantage to the entitlement group and still gives opportunity for anyone to draw.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

And while I'm at it, I'll throw my 2 cents in and assert that point systems DO hurt hunter recruitment. I saw it firsthand with one of my friends a few years ago.

He expressed interest in trying big game hunting. I told him he could start applying for general deer, but he probably wouldn't draw it in the unit I hunt until next year due to the preference point system.

He wasn't super interested in paying for a license and a point for and having almost no chance at a draw. He asked whether the antlerless draw might get him a tag. Same story, I told him - there was virtually no chance at a deer or pronghorn tag without point, and no elk tags unless he wanted to try a unit I had never been on.

He ultimately didn't apply for any tags that year, and I don't blame him - it's hard to want to shell out a bunch of money for a license and points if you're a casual newcomer.

We ended up hunting the general any bull hunt, so thank goodness for that opportunity.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

MadHunter said:


> A lot of us were around before the point system was put in place. Heck I remember buying a deer tag and being able to hunt anywhere in the state and all 3 weapon seasons.


So remind me again, how great the elk hunting was then. And the reason deer tags went from 200,000+ to 90,000.
I won't ask about the OIL tags because I have never worried about them. But I don't really recall any back in the day.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

middlefork said:


> So remind me again, how great the elk hunting was then. And the reason deer tags went from 200,000+ to 90,000.
> 
> I won't ask about the OIL tags because I have never worried about them. But I don't really recall any back in the day.


Plenty of ways to reduce opportunity, various ways to run a draw system as noted just by looking at the states that border Utah.
The current draw system does an excellent job setting the value tags by using years it takes to draw as the measuring stick, really helps at auction time.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> I don't think you see the big picture. Full random is not dependant on who or who doesn't apply or the past draw results it's the same for every application every single year. What gets kicked down the road except entitlement?
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


Umm.

Yes it is.

I have seen areas that were 100% go to 40% in a year.

It comes down to the amount of people applying for the available tags.

Like I mentioned before Manti early LE Elk has 3,000 people applying for 125 tags on the resident side and even if that went to a lottery people could go their lifetime without drawing. Giving people additional chances and giving some precedence to those at the top is a fair system.

Much fairer than in Colorado with a 100% preference point system, where you are locked out until you reach that top class.

As far as entitlement, You can draw with 0 or 20 in the Utah system. It is a pretty fair system as far as the draw goes. It also funds the wildlife.

Like I mentioned before, Residents scoff at the idea of tag price increases. If you took points away then you would have to find another way to bring in a million+ from those that do not draw.

Also, as far as entitlement why do residents get 90% of the tags. If we want to make it fair, then put them in the same draw without quotas on each.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Clarq said:


> Nevada has the best point system out there, IMO. They "square" your points and then add one more for the current year, and you get that many chances in the draw. No permits are reserved for top point holders.
> 
> The guy with 25 points gets 25 * 25 + 1 = 626 chances to draw.
> 
> ...


Yeah, Squaring bonus points is not a great system.

The issue is when you get multiple people at the top with bookoo points.

If you have 100 people in a hunt with 20 points, then that is 401 x 100, which is 40,100 chances to your 17. So, it turns into a preference point system.

The thing that makes Nevada cooler than the rest is that you get 5 choices on each application. You can swing for the fences on your first three and put two lessor choices at the end or just swing 5 times for the fence.

I do not think there is an ideal system in the west, but Utah is pretty close to it. Probably, only behind Arizona.

Utah 50% Top / 50% Bonus Point, 10% Tags

Wyoming 75% Top / 25% Lottery, 16-24% Tags

Colorado 100% Top, Uber Tags 20-25% (I think)

Arizona 20% Top / 80% Bonus Point, 10% Tags

Nevada Bonus Squared, 10% Tags

Montana Bonus Squared, up to 10% Tags

New Mexico Lottery, 6% Tags

Idaho Lottery up to 10% Tags

If I had a preferred system it would be just a bonus point system.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Umm.
> 
> Yes it is.
> 
> ...


Every single applicant in the same draw are EQUAL in odds of drawing in a random draw system that is a FACT. 
Any additional preference for anyone else is all about entitlement also a fact.
It's ok to agree with adding preference (why all draw systems vary from state to state). I personally don't agree that it's necessary. 
If the goal is to give preference to those who wait longest why is Utah extending that preference to youth using the mentor program?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

middlefork said:


> Too bad the full random draw guys either weren't born yet or too young to to make much noise when the current system was put in place.
> Hind sight may be 20/20 but when the current plan was put in place it sounded very good to most of us at the time.
> I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few max point holders and high point holders don't put in to draw just to irritate you guys


It was a good idea then. No one thought it would start being 25+ bonus points before you would draw. In our lifetime we will watch the number rise every single year.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

You all want to help the draw odds simply force hunters to pick a single species per year, period.

You can apply for an OIL only, or Elk only, or Deer only or Pronghorn only etc etc. Most guys here apply for two or three species every year. Drop that to one species and you will decrease the draw odds dramatically.


-DallanC


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Have I mentioned placing a cap on the number of points? So if the cap was 30 points, then a person would have to apply and invest for 30 years to reach top level. But at some point they could reach the top level. 

In time, with no change to Utah's system, we will see people with 51 points and people with 50 will still not be in the top level. 50 years of applying and people will still not be in the top level...... 

..


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Umm.
> 
> Yes it is.
> 
> ...


Lol at so many things here. I can't help but think specifically about the bottom. Yep, we should allow everyone in the world to come to Utah. That wouldn't hurt odds.

As for price tag increases.. umm, the application fee isn't going away? So why would you have to find another revenue source? The same number of tags are going out as before, so the same sales apply.

You know what else I think we should do that will really piss people off? Charge the money upfront.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Yeah, Squaring bonus points is not a great system.
> 
> The issue is when you get multiple people at the top with bookoo points.
> 
> ...


I agree Utah system is far from the worst across the west, but it could be improved. Simply only using even tag numbers for units would be a start to truly being a 50/50 system. Part of the problem with Utah is we are managing the majority of the state for limited entry, basically limiting general hunting and opportunity. Colorado system works for residents because they provide lots of opportunities to hunt while waiting on a limited entry tag.

If Nevada limited applicants to two choices odds of drawing would drastically change for the better. People would then decide if they wanted to draw low end units or have a real chance to draw mid grade units or continue wait for a premium unit.

I would agree a bonus point system is the best way to give preference for waiting while still giving opportunity for everyone to draw.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Packout said:


> Have I mentioned placing a cap on the number of points? So if the cap was 30 points, then a person would have to apply and invest for 30 years to reach top level. But at some point they could reach the top level.
> 
> In time, with no change to Utah's system, we will see people with 51 points and people with 50 will still not be in the top level. 50 years of applying and people will still not be in the top level......
> 
> ..


A cap would not work because you would take the added yearly preference from those who waited longest (can gain no further advantage because can not add more points) but still give it to those who waited less (still earning points until they also cap out)

Are you perhaps talking about freezing the current system and letting it run its course until everyone is out of points then it's a full random system?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

DallanC said:


> You all want to help the draw odds simply force hunters to pick a single species per year, period.
> 
> You can apply for an OIL only, or Elk only, or Deer only or Pronghorn only etc etc. Most guys here apply for two or three species every year. Drop that to one species and you will decrease the draw odds dramatically.
> 
> -DallanC


Similar to the Idaho approach, very interesting idea. What would utah do for opportunity hunts? Change nothing?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I've said for a long time that I don't mind people being forced to pick between LE or general season deer because a guy can still hunt for trophies on general season units. But, for elk, I am totally against the idea of forcing someone to pick between buying a general season spike tag and applying for an LE tag. Hunting spikes is where a lot of us cut our teeth on elk hunting; it is the necessary learning curve we tackle on these hunts that allows us success on the LE hunt.

By applying for multiple hunts in the same year, I am increasing the odds (even if it is only minutely) of getting a tag and being able to hunt. I would fight that proposal tooth and nail...


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

The "pick a single species" would be extremely hard to implement actually, as we still have approximately 4000 lifetime deer license holders. I dont think you could force them to pick between deer and another species.

4000 is more total tags than some entire micro-units.


-DallanC


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> I've said for a long time that I don't mind people being forced to pick between LE or general season deer because a guy can still hunt for trophies on general season units. But, for elk, I am totally against the idea of forcing someone to pick between buying a general season spike tag and applying for an LE tag. Hunting spikes is where a lot of us cut our teeth on elk hunting; it is the necessary learning curve we tackle on these hunts that allows us success on the LE hunt.
> 
> By applying for multiple hunts in the same year, I am increasing the odds (even if it is only minutely) of getting a tag and being able to hunt. I would fight that proposal tooth and nail...


On way to accomplish the elk is to lower age objective and make some more units more opportunity focused. Trophy growing is what has drove the point system to this stage. Yes Utah needs places that have 350+ bulls that means increased age structure and reduced tag numbers. Wouldn't it be ok to increase tags on the units with large elk habitat? Still growing large number of elk, still have the potential to grow large bulls by having areas they can escape pressure.

I feel the current elk plans are built around lobbying cwmu stake holders and how much "thier" elk tags can be sold for. That's no way to manage wildlife

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Yes. I do believe our LE elk hunts are geared too much towards the high end bulls. We could reduce the age structure of some of our LE elk units to say 2-3 or 3-4 year old bulls instead of 5-6, 6-7, or higher. By doing this, we could give out more tags. I've been saying this for years...give out more tags and lower age objectives.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Yes. I do believe our LE elk hunts are geared too much towards the high end bulls. We could reduce the age structure of some of our LE elk units to say 2-3 or 3-4 year old bulls instead of 5-6, 6-7, or higher. By doing this, we could give out more tags. I've been saying this for years...give out more tags and lower age objectives.


Would you be in favor of moving any weapon LE elk? 
I do think that "might" be a way to also increase opportunities. If your muzzleloader is going to be unrestricted it's kind of a mute point though.
Arizona has less elk but has found ways to increase opportunity, simply by keeping killing elk hard.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

NO. About 5 or so years ago I spent a lot of time looking at how many more tags we could add if we moved the rifle hunt out of the rut...it wasn't enough to make any real difference because all rifle hunts have high success rates. I'm not much of a rifle hunter, but the majority are. I don't have a problem with the majority hunting the rut because their success rate is high whether it is or is not in the rut.

Arizona also doesn't give even half as much elk hunting opportunity as Utah. They don't have OTC spike and any bull hunts like Utah does. I would also be against eliminating these hunts.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> NO. About 5 or so years ago I spent a lot of time looking at how many more tags we could add if we moved the rifle hunt out of the rut...it wasn't enough to make any real difference because all rifle hunts have high success rates. I'm not much of a rifle hunter, but the majority are. I don't have a problem with the majority hunting the rut because their success rate is high whether it is or is not in the rut.
> 
> Arizona also doesn't give even half as much elk hunting opportunity as Utah. They don't have OTC spike and any bull hunts like Utah does. I would also be against eliminating these hunts.


Interesting thanks I've never crunched the numbers myself. 
Utah does have the sole honor of an any weapon elk rut hunting. The success rates for the mid season hunts on manti and fish lake are lower than then the early hunt on those same units. 
In your opinion there room for adjusting the percentage of tags that are allocated to each weapon type? ie.. Moving the majority away from rifle? 
These are the tough questions that need answers if opportunity is going to be increased here.

Edited to add my Arizona comments relate to numbers of elk in the state vs number of tags issue


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

weaversamuel76 said:


> The success rates for the mid season hunts on manti and fish lake are lower than then the early hunt on those same units.
> In your opinion there room for adjusting the percentage of tags that are allocated to each weapon type? ie.. Moving the majority away from rifle?
> These are the tough questions that need answers if opportunity is going to be increased here.


I would contend that some of the difference in success rates of those hunts can be contributed to the fact that 1) there are less desirable bull elk to hunt following the archery, muzzy, and early elk seasons and the fact that some bulls are broken and 2) the elk have been hunted hard to this point and have been pushed to harder to access areas.

I would favor adjusting the percentage of tags, but that will be a hard sell because the majority of hunters prefer using a rifle. Also, more archery or muzzy tags could also make hunting more difficult for those primitive weapon hunters...more tags=more pressure.

Check out this old discussion: https://utahwildlife.net/forum/12-big-game/25776-rifle-elk-hunts-during-rut.html


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Every single applicant in the same draw are EQUAL in odds of drawing in a random draw system that is a FACT.
> 
> *As I have said. It doesn't matter than much due to the number of people applying for the tag. You have way too many people applying for a limited number of tags. I also do not believe that draw odds should be equal. I believe this isn't about participation trophies, it is about funding wildlife.*
> 
> ...


See Red


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Yes not everyone would draw a tag when there are more applicants than tags otherwise you wouldn't need a draw. Odds are equal for all participants in a random draw."Fair" isn't that just an interpretation and opinions can and will vary.

I don't understand the funding for wildlife argument. Isn't buying license doing the funding? Isn't every applicant funding equally?

Buying and keeping points does nothing extra for funding. I love to see some documents starting otherwise.

Auctioning off every single tag would definitely raise more money for wildlife unless we let someone disperse those funds without accountability.









Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

RandomElk16 said:


> Lol at so many things here. I can't help but think specifically about the bottom. Yep, we should allow everyone in the world to come to Utah. That wouldn't hurt odds.
> 
> As for price tag increases.. umm, the application fee isn't going away? So why would you have to find another revenue source? The same number of tags are going out as before, so the same sales apply.
> 
> You know what else I think we should do that will really piss people off? Charge the money upfront.


Charging money up front may be becoming a thing of the past. It costs way too much to refund the money to the point that states are losing money doing it.

Alaska lets everyone apply and it seems to work out as a counter point to all states applying.

Now if you want to dive into the rabbit hole of Utah Hunting and tag allocations, then you will have to look at CMWU, Land Owners, and Lifetime Licenses. There could be a lot more tags to be had if CMWU permits were in the draw for residents and non residents. As well as putting a 1 to 1 tag allocation. 1 Non Resident tag for every resident tag. Land owner tags were in the draw as well and only good for the property or a few miles from the property. As well if you switched lifetime hunters over to dedicated in that they can only harvest two bucks in three years. There would be a bunch more tags to go round.

You would lose money overall with the points only crew. People that put in other people or put in and can't go that year. You would lose that source of income for the year.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Interesting thanks I've never crunched the numbers myself.
> Utah does have the sole honor of an any weapon elk rut hunting. The success rates for the mid season hunts on manti and fish lake are lower than then the early hunt on those same units.
> In your opinion there room for adjusting the percentage of tags that are allocated to each weapon type? ie.. Moving the majority away from rifle?
> These are the tough questions that need answers if opportunity is going to be increased here.
> ...


Idaho and Arizona have rifle rut hunts, but they are few and limited on tags.

I would actually be in favor of a hunt rotation for LE Elk.

Archery, ML, Rifle

ML, Rifle, Archery

Rifle, Archery, ML

That way every third year you can have your weapon of choice during the rut.

It would also make some hunts easier or harder to draw on some years and make people attempt to think before applying.

While, I do agree that this wouldn't do much for putting more tags on the board, because all the LE elk hunts have a good success rate; it would be fun to see the chaos unfold.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Auctioning off every single tag would definitely raise more money for wildlife unless we let someone disperse those funds without accountability.


I've been saying all tags should be a dutch auction for over a decade. I know I am willing to pay more for a tag than most of you cheap $%#$% 

LOL

-DallanC


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Whitefish thanks for your perspective on entitlement I've never thought of it that way. Something to ponder

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Charging money up front may be becoming a thing of the past. It costs way too much to refund the money to the point that states are losing money doing it.
> 
> Alaska lets everyone apply and it seems to work out as a counter point to all states applying.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but if was full random, more people would probably apply period. You would NOT lose money in a full random system.

You can't take away lifetime hunter tags, they made a large investment for those at the time.

Not sure why you pitch all this non-res yoohoo stuff. We will not be the state that bails on it's people for non res.

As for CWMU - take away their incentive? Then why the hell would they have it hahaha.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Charging money up front may be becoming a thing of the past. It costs way too much to refund the money to the point that states are losing money doing it.


So up the application fee by the amount it costs them in overhead to do the refund. Cant be more than $5 an app.



> Alaska lets everyone apply and it seems to work out as a counter point to all states applying.


I agree with you way more often than not in most things... but Alaska is an entirely different situation due to the stupendous amount of acreage to hunt vs the number of actual hunters. There are places in Alaska still that have never been walked on by a human.



> Now if you want to dive into the rabbit hole of Utah Hunting and tag allocations, then you will have to look at CMWU, Land Owners, and Lifetime Licenses. There could be a lot more tags to be had if CMWU permits were in the draw for residents and non residents. As well as putting a 1 to 1 tag allocation. 1 Non Resident tag for every resident tag. Land owner tags were in the draw as well and only good for the property or a few miles from the property. As well if you switched lifetime hunters over to dedicated in that they can only harvest two bucks in three years. There would be a bunch more tags to go round.


Absolutely. CWMUs should offer a better ratio to the public. I understand initially the offering was to get landowners to even consider the system, and allow public guys to come hunt on their land.

But times have changed... I doubt there is a single large acreage property owner in the state that doesnt know he can get $10k off a single bull tag. They will stay in the game.

Up the split to maybe 70:30 (its what, 90:10 atm?), that would still give the landowner alot of tags to sell, meanwhile offering more tags to move people through the current system.

-DallanC


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Yes not everyone would draw a tag when there are more applicants than tags otherwise you wouldn't need a draw. Odds are equal for all participants in a random draw."Fair" isn't that just an interpretation and opinions can and will vary.
> 
> I don't understand the funding for wildlife argument. Isn't buying license doing the funding? Isn't every applicant funding equally?
> 
> ...


https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/bg/2019/19_bg-odds.pdf

LE Deer - 17,000 points were purchased - $170k

LE Elk - 30,000 points were purchased - 300k

LE Pronghorn - 9,000 points were purchased - 90k

OIL Moose - 17,000 points were purchased - 170k

OIL Bison - 10,000 points were purchased -100k

OIL D Sheep - 9,500 points were purchased -95k

OIL R Sheep - 8,200 points were purchased -82k

OIL M Goat - 15,000 points were purchased -150k

GS Deer - 20,000 points were purchased - 200k

DH Deer - 1,200 points were purchased -12k

Doe Deer - 1,800 points were purchased -18k

Cow Elk - 4,000 points were purchased -40k

Cow Moose - 4,500 points were purchased - 45k

Doe Pronghorn - 1,800 points were purchased. 18k

I mean, this doesn't take into account the licenses that had to be purchased, but it is over a million for people that are not hunting that species this season.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/bg/2019/19_bg-odds.pdf
> 
> LE Deer - 17,000 points were purchased - $170k
> 
> ...


Fyi that money doesn't go to wildlife.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

DallanC said:


> So up the application fee by the amount it costs them in overhead to do the refund. Cant be more than $5 an app.
> 
> *Wyoming is moving away from it and Colorado has moved away from it due to costs. It is cheaper not to require money up front, for whatever reason. Doesn't make sense to me, but it is apparently the reality.*
> 
> ...


I still like the 1:1, because you will still get the Joe Rogan's and Cam Hanes' of the world to have under armour to buy them an 18k elk tag on deseret every year. Just make it more equal to the hunter. Also, maybe make the NR tags auction tags and put the public tags back in the draw and auction off CMWU tags. Operators could make more money in this scenario.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Fyi that money doesn't go to wildlife.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


Where is your supporting documentation on where it actually goes?


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Where is your supporting documentation on where it actually goes?


It goes to Fallon to pay administration fees of the draw

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

RandomElk16 said:


> Yeah, but if was full random, more people would probably apply period. You would NOT lose money in a full random system.
> 
> You can't take away lifetime hunter tags, they made a large investment for those at the time.
> 
> ...


I disagree.

I think the points give people a sense of moving closer.

Idaho and New Mexico are not nearly as popular as Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado despite having a lottery system.

The Lottery system would mitigate people from buying licenses and applying on years they do not plan to hunt.

Given how many people put in for points only and generating over a million dollars on that, I think it would be really difficult to make up.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> It goes to Fallon to pay administration fees of the draw
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


So, what you are saying is that all the point fees and application fees from the draw go to Fallon?

Do you have any documentation to support this?

I think I would be more outraged at this then anything else, but Utah could easily run the draw themselves by hiring two accountants at 60k a year (state gov jobs typically do not pay well and 60k may be a little high) to run them and come out way ahead.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> So, what you are saying is that all the point fees and application fees from the draw go to Fallon?
> 
> Do you have any documentation to support this?
> 
> I think I would be more outraged at this then anything else, but Utah could easily run the draw themselves by hiring two accountants at 60k a year (state gov jobs typically do not pay well and 60k may be a little high) to run them and come out way ahead.


Similar to how SFW runs the expo draw out of thier basement picking winners at random or much more likely not random at all.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I think I would be more outraged at this then anything else, but Utah could easily run the draw themselves by hiring two accountants at 60k a year (state gov jobs typically do not pay well and 60k may be a little high) to run them and come out way ahead.


Utah cant run a lottery...

... unless its the convention draw, then a guy in woods cross without a business license does it in his basement.

-DallanC


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Similar to how SFW runs the expo draw out of thier basement picking winners at random or much more likely not random at all.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


Which is why all draws should be televised or streamed.

You can make ad revenue to cover the costs of the draw.

Just make sure none of the envelopes are frozen.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think the points give people a sense of moving closer.
> 
> ...


That's because they don't really understand the system. We have seen evidence of this right here on this forum. Fact: The vast majority of new hunters don't stand a chance at drawing an LE tag, that cannot be disputed. Sure once in a while you get the newbie that draws with 0 to 3 points but they are few and far between.


----------



## Ray (May 10, 2018)

I’ve been trying to talk the wife into moving to Idaho for a long time now because of the way Utah is ran. I’ve got her pretty close to saying yes, she’s actually been looking at houses. 

Nice thing about having a job I can do from anywhere I guess. 👌


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> I still like the 1:1, because you will still get the Joe Rogan's and Cam Hanes' of the world to have under armour to buy them an 18k elk tag on deseret every year. Just make it more equal to the hunter. Also, maybe make the NR tags auction tags and put the public tags back in the draw and auction off CMWU tags. Operators could make more money in this scenario.


I wrote a big response but whatever.. Frankly this wouldn't work. There has to be incentive for the CWMU. These are typically cattle ranches first and foremost and this is extra revenue. Much more of a split and they are better off going to a pay-to-trespass or a landowner permit model.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

MuscleWhitefish said:


> Which is why all draws should be televised or streamed.
> 
> You can make ad revenue to cover the costs of the draw.
> 
> Just make sure none of the envelopes are frozen.


Lol... so increase the cost of the draws? The ad revenue after costs will not support the additional draw.

You want them to open envelopes for how many permits????


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

RandomElk16 said:


> Lol... so increase the cost of the draws? The ad revenue after costs will not support the additional draw.
> 
> You want them to open envelopes for how many permits????


The Frozen envelope is paying tribute the NBA lottery scandal that netted the Knicks Patrick Ewing.

I think giving everyone a number and watching to see if your number hits. It would lead to an ultimate excitement in the draw process and the DWR's can make money off advertisements.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> T The vast majority of new hunters don't stand a chance at drawing an LE tag, that cannot be disputed. Sure once in a while you get the newbie that draws with 0 to 3 points but they are few and far between.


Oh come one...that's garbage. I just spent 5 minutes going through the most recent points report and saw that 121 people drew with 0 or 1 point out of 1184 applicants for LE deer. That is 10% of those applicants. For elk, 212 people drew with 0 or 1 points out of 3098 applicants or about 7% of those applicants.

Sorry, but I don't think someone who has never put in should have a better chance. I think those people should wait in line. I do believe those who have been putting in the longest should be entitled to better odds of drawing...


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> Oh come one...that's garbage. I just spent 5 minutes going through the most recent points report and saw that 121 people drew with 0 or 1 point out of 1184 applicants for LE deer. That is 10% of those applicants. For elk, 212 people drew with 0 or 1 points out of 3098 applicants or about 7% of those applicants.
> 
> Sorry, but I don't think someone who has never put in should have a better chance. I think those people should wait in line. I do believe those who have been putting in the longest should be entitled to better odds of drawing...


Are you quoting numbers for 1 LE unit for deer and 1 unit for elk? Is it even a desirable unit? What unit is it? and What are the numbers overall for LE draws?

Also, you not thinking that someone who has never entered the drawing should "NOT" have a better chance is a sentiment we all share. A full random draw doesn't give them a better chance; it gives them an equal one. That statement also highlights your selfish sense of entitlement. It shows that you believe it takes something away from you that you don't even have to begin with.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Brilliant Dallan....absolutely brilliant!!!!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Are you quoting numbers for 1 LE unit for deer and 1 unit for elk? Is it even a desirable unit? What unit is it? and What are the numbers overall for LE draws?
> 
> Also, you not thinking that someone who has never entered the drawing should have a better chance is a sentiment we all share. A full random draw doesn't give them a better chance; it gives them an equal one. That statement also highlights your selfish sense of entitlement. It shows that you believe it takes something away from you that you don't even have to begin with.


NO. Those numbers are for ALL. Those are the TOTALS. The chances are MUCH better than you imply.

NO, I don't share the sentiment that someone who has never entered the drawing should have a better or equal chance. Reread what I said. I think that someone who hasn't entered the drawing before should be at the end of the line and should NOT have a better or equal chance. I don't think they should have an equal chance to someone who has waited 15 or more years. I think they should be at the end of the line.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Hey if we are talking making changes to avoid long waits, I want to start collecting my Social Security right now please. 


-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

wyoming2utah said:


> NO. Those numbers are for ALL. Those are the TOTALS. The chances are MUCH better than you imply.


I doubt those numbers are total.



wyoming2utah said:


> Oh come one...that's garbage. I just spent 5 minutes going through the most recent points report and saw that 121 people drew with 0 or 1 point out of 1184 applicants for LE deer. That is 10% of those applicants. For elk, 212 people drew with 0 or 1 points out of 3098 applicants or about 7% of those applicants.


You are saying that only 1184 applied for LE deer tags? 
You are also saying that only 3098 applied for LE elk tags?
You have to be talking about a single unit.
Can you provide your source? I really think you may have misread it.



wyoming2utah said:


> Sorry, but I don't think someone who has never put in should have a better chance. I think those people should wait in line. I do believe those who have been putting in the longest should be entitled to better odds of drawing...
> 
> NO, I don't share the sentiment that someone who has never entered the drawing should have a better chance. Reread what I said. I think that someone who hasn't entered the drawing before should be at the end of the line and should NOT have a better chance. I don't think they should have an equal chance to someone who has waited 15 or more years. I think they should be at the end of the line.


My mistake on that one; I omitted a "NOT" from that statement. I have edited, corrected and noted my omission.

Doesn't change the fact that it's a drawing and you feel entitled for having played for 15 years. If chances of drawing are actually not that bad, as you state and point out with your odds, then you should have already drawn after 15 years and you should also feel robbed and cheated of your tag by all those hundreds that already drew a tag without waiting in line like you have. Just using your logic.

For what it's worth it's all opinions and what not so we should take them for what they are worth. I hope everyone gets a good , fair and descent chance at the tag of their life. It's just so difficult to make it fair and equitable. I personally don't know what that looks like so all I have is my opinion.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> I doubt those numbers are total.
> 
> Doubt all you want. But, you will be wrong. They are totals
> 
> ...


See the above responses in red.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

That's not they way it reads but, I will hand that to you now you clarify it.

However, If you take the the odds of those people overall it's dismal. I might even crunch some numbers and report back.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

Well that's not what these odds say almost 5200 applicants applied for le elk and not counting point buyers. I'd love to see where your odds came from


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> See the above responses in red.


7000 applicants applied for le elk with zero points what list are you looking at?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I'm not sure where the "fair and equitable" comes into play? The system was never meant be either.
The system rewards longevity by awarding more chances to draw one number that falls within the lowest numbers drawn for the available tags.
So maybe you math wizards can figure out how much each point increases your odds.
Or maybe put those same skills to work and make enough money to bypass the heartburn and buy a tag. Seems like there are more than a few every year that do it that way.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

LE deer 2019 applicant's.

With zero or 1 point there where 8,136 applicants.

There was 122 that drew permits out of that group.


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

To slow or stop point creep, do these few simple things:
•Charge application fees up front.
•Abolish mentor program.
•Abolish youth tag allotments.
•Put LE elk archery season during rut with appropriately increased amount of tags, then muzzleloader, followed by rifle.
•Do whatever it takes to discourage new hunter recruitement.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> LE deer 2019 applicant's.
> 
> With zero or 1 point there where 8,136 applicants.
> 
> There was 122 that drew permits out of that group.


Yes, that is correct (I'll insert my foot in my mouth). I was looking at the bonus point purchases. Neverthless, 122 people still drew that tag. Overall, for both deer and elk about 1.5% of the people with 0 or 1 point drew a tag.

Again, though, I say keep things the way they are and reward those longest in line with the best odds of drawing....those people are entitled to better odds!


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Yes, that is correct (I'll insert my foot in my mouth). I was looking at the bonus point purchases. Neverthless, 122 people still drew that tag. Overall, for both deer and elk about 1.5% of the people with 0 or 1 point drew a tag.
> 
> Again, though, I say keep things the way they are and reward those longest in line with the best odds of drawing....those people are entitled to better odds!


**** my math sucks too
I do know that there are 66407 residents with points for elk * IF *we closed all new applicants out and keep the standard 2705 permits a year it would only take 24 years for all point holders to draw.

24 years this is your great plan


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> Hey if we are talking making changes to avoid long waits, I want to start collecting my Social Security right now please.
> 
> -DallanC


Social security was literally developed for survivor, retirement, and disability purposes.

It serves that purpose.

Wildlife draws were NOT developed for those purposes.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

weaversamuel76 said:


> **** my math sucks too
> I do know that there are 66407 residents with points for elk * IF *we closed all new applicants out and keep the standard 2705 permits a year it would only take 24 years for all point holders to draw.
> 
> 24 years this is your great plan


My plan? No. My plan is to keep putting in until I draw again (and I will). Like has already been mentioned, we have a limited resource...and more people than tags. That won't change. But, I do think that those who have been applying the longest should have the best odds of drawing. That is the current plan. I don't think someone with zero or one point should have better odds or even the same odds than the guy who has been putting in for 15 years...that is your plan. I like the current one. NO system will allow everyone to draw...so don't create these what-if scenarios that try to draw it up that way.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

weaversamuel76 said:


> **** my math sucks too
> I do know that there are 66407 residents with points for elk * IF *we closed all new applicants out and keep the standard 2705 permits a year it would only take 24 years for all point holders to draw.
> 
> 24 years this is your great plan


No the plan is to continue to allow everyone to participate in a "random" draw for half of the available tags. The other half is set aside to those who have waited decades.

Are you guys seriously trying the tired millennial trope of everyone is equal and everything is fair? Sorry, world doesnt work like that no mater how much you want it.

It sucks for people born to late to have never had the chance to buy microsoft stock at $21 a share (now worth $32k), how can we make that fair... lol

-DallanC


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> My plan? No. My plan is to keep putting in until I draw again (and I will). Like has already been mentioned, we have a limited resource...and more people than tags. That won't change. But, I do think that those who have been applying the longest should have the best odds of drawing. That is the current plan. I don't think someone with zero or one point should have better odds or even the same odds than the guy who has been putting in for 15 years...that is your plan. I like the current one. NO system will allow everyone to draw...so don't create these what-if scenarios that try to draw it up that way.


I didn't use any scenario, I simply posted the numbers in the draw report. Apparently some people can't understand what they mean.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Posting the numbers in a what-if scenario...I don't think any plan is designed to assure everyone a tag. That isn't the point and shouldn't be the point. The point is to give those who have waited the longest the best chance.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

DallanC said:


> No the plan is to continue to allow everyone to participate in a "random" draw for half of the available tags. The other half is set aside to those who have waited decades.
> 
> Are you guys seriously trying the tired millennial trope of everyone is equal and everything is fair? Sorry, world doesnt work like that no mater how much you want it.
> 
> ...


1380 = 1345? Doesn't seem like 50% but makes a difference in the odds at the bottom.

Guess it depends on how you want to place your entitlements in the draw plan. I will continue to push for a more equitible draw system.

Every year the bottom tier odds suck worse but their license money by sheer volume numbers funds more of this states programs than the top.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Posting the numbers in a what-if scenario...I don't think any plan is designed to assure everyone a tag. That isn't the point and shouldn't be the point. The point is to give those who have waited the longest the best chance.


The current plan denoted if you wait long enough you'll get "YOUR" tag. Which isn't true any more.

Those are facts with numbers. 66000+ have points only 2700 tags are issued each year.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Equitable? Sorry, but I don't think it is equitable to give everyone the same odds...especially when those guys at the top have been supporting and funding state programs a lot longer than those at the bottom. Those guys at the top have been buying licenses for years and years...I would bet that they have by "sheer volume" of years funded more of this state's programs than those at the bottom.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

weaversamuel76 said:


> The current plan denoted if you wait long enough you'll get "YOUR" tag. Which isn't true any more.
> 
> Those are facts with numbers. 66000+ have points only 2700 tags are issued each year.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


But, it will somehow change with this new equitable plan you propose? That's garbage. What we do know with the current plan is that those at the top of the list have better odds...that's how it should be.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Equitable? Sorry, but I don't think it is equitable to give everyone the same odds...especially when those guys at the top have been supporting and funding state programs a lot longer than those at the bottom. Those guys at the top have been buying licenses for years and years...I would bet that they have by "sheer volume" of years funded more of this state's programs than those at the bottom.


Those are the same guys that opposed every license increase. That formed SFW that placed politics over solid wildlife management. That sucked the best tags from the draw to be auctioned off so rich guys can bypass Utah's current awesome draw system. So thanks for that sorry short sighted, kick the can down the road approach. Sounds like the same approach is still being pushed by some now. Hope your kids ask you WHY WHY WHY when they see what YOU have advocated for them.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> No the plan is to continue to allow everyone to participate in a "random" draw for half of the available tags. The other half is set aside to those who have waited decades.
> 
> Are you guys seriously trying the tired millennial trope of everyone is equal and everything is fair? Sorry, world doesnt work like that no mater how much you want it.
> 
> ...


I love the easy cop-out argument that this is somehow a millennial mindset. That same Social Security you brought up will be empty by the time most of us get there. This isn't an entitlement mindset, it's looking at a system that is compounding into a worse system year over year. Social security has been broken forever, we know it's going to run out. Yet we keep throwing money at it until it collapses. I may NEVER draw in a random system, so how is that entitled? This isn't about one of us.

Also, the other half isn't random, there are points in that too. We like to call it random, but the more points you have the more it benefits you in that also. So don't infer the two as equal.

And really? Microsoft stock? Stop using stupid analogies. This isn't the same as stock, or an age thing. It's a broken system thing. Once all you old people are dead, it will still be broken. The system is literally on pace to surpass 50 points in some of our lives, and at minimum our kids lives. What is the point of that?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Oh come on...that's bs too. To say that every guy from an older generation fought license increases and supports SFW. Come on...we both know that ain't true. And, no...my approach isn't short sighted. It is looking out for the guys who have waited the longest. It is assuring that guys who have not drawn year in and year out will have better odds the following year. That's how it should be.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> What is the point of that?


Do I really need to answer that for you? Seriously. It is because we want the guys who have been waiting the longest to have the best odds. The current plan does that. It should do that.

ON a side note, do you seriously think that the number of people applying will exponentially increase forever? You don't see that number flatlining or falling at some point?

If I am not mistaken--and my math has already proven to be flawed--but LE deer applicants/point holders has fallen from 2018 to 2019.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Oh come on...that's bs too. To say that every guy from an older generation fought license increases and supports SFW. Come on...we both know that ain't true. And, no...my approach isn't short sighted. It is looking out for the guys who have waited the longest. It is assuring that guys who have not drawn year in and year out will have better odds the following year. That's how it should be.


Why? Isn't that an entitlement issue more than the one we are proposing?


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Do I really need to answer that for you? Seriously. It is because we want the guys who have been waiting the longest to have the best odds. The current plan does that. It should do that.
> 
> ON a side note, do you seriously think that the number of people applying will exponentially increase forever? You don't see that number flatlining or falling at some point?
> 
> If I am not mistaken--and my math has already proven to be flawed--but LE deer applicants/point holders has fallen from 2018 to 2019.


Utah is one of the fastest growing states. The wasatch front has 2 Million people, by 2050 they project 5 Million people.

Looking at one pool? Total applications have increased OVERALL.

Not only does this mean more population (the number of applicants HAS increased every year), but this also means more human bull**** where we demolish habitat and wintering grounds. Populations of animals will inevitably decrease.

So yes. We will continue to see an increase.

And why should the system be a line? The line already isn't "fair" because some people get picked out of it at random parts, sometimes guys from the front or second group are picked before guys in front of them, sometimes guys have to wait the ENTIRE line. Sometimes a dude at the back of the line gets a tag.

If the system already has "exceptions" it can't be argued as "fair". Maybe it's "more fair" to you but that doesn't equate to fair. You can argue that already is enough variability in drawing that we don't need random. I disagree.

We saw a decrease in 100 applicants between 18 and 19, after seeing an increase of 2000 the year before. Lots of things can explain that. LE Elk increased by 2000 this year.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> If I am not mistaken--and my math has already proven to be flawed--but LE deer applicants/point holders has fallen from 2018 to 2019.


Your correct 90 less people applied for deer. Not sure perhaps maybe more new applicants decided it's not worth a twenty year wait to rifle hunt the Vernon lol

What Utah really needs is more limited entry hunts and getting those that waited the longest tags.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Your correct 90 less people applied for deer. Not sure perhaps maybe more new applicants decided it's not worth a twenty year wait to rifle hunt the Vernon lol
> 
> What Utah really needs is more limited entry hunts and getting those that waited the longest tags.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


I just checked Elk, Moose, and Pronghorn. All saw pretty large increases (1000-2000+)

GS Deer saw a slight increase (180)

Edits:

Antlerless deer saw an increase of 1800- massive increase for a pool that was below 10K applicants last year.

Antlerless elk increased by 1000.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Why? Isn't that an entitlement issue more than the one we are proposing?


Maybe...but those guys waiting in line should be entitled to better odds.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Utah is one of the fastest growing states. The wasatch front has 2 Million people, by 2050 they project 5 Million people.
> 
> Looking at one pool? Total applications have increased OVERALL.


Yep, you are right. We are one of the fastest growing states. You don't think that will have negative impacts in big game numbers? You don't think that the urbanization of the wasatch front and utah overall will lead to an eventual decrease in overall hunter numbers? I do.

Regardless, I do think those waiting the longest should have the best odds.
Do you really think that you move people any faster through the system any other way? It won't change the fact that some people will wait really long times or never draw at all for tags...regardless of the plan.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Maybe...but those guys waiting in line should be entitled to better odds.


Why? Just.. because they didn't draw? Bad luck doesn't entitle you to better luck. Part of why I like full random.

I also like it because all of these conversations, all the draws, everything becomes substantially easier for applicants and DWR. We might actually have board decisions based on wildlife, not on point holders!

I don't think hunters decrease. I think animal populations are hit harder than hunter numbers. Even if numbers of hunters decline, habitat will decline faster.

Our increase in applicants EVERY YEAR says your theory isn't happening yet. I met a bunch of dudes from California this year - new to Utah and ready to kill.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

I paid for bonus points in good faith to allow me an advantage in the draw.

I will happily join any class action lawsuit against the state if they try to remove those points.

Now if they choose to no longer give out new bonus points, thats ok. Eventually points holders will die off or draw. Then you get your fully random draw (and probably never hunt again).


-DallanC


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> I don't think hunters decrease. I think animal populations are hit harder than hunter numbers. Even if numbers of hunters decline, habitat will decline faster.
> 
> Our increase in applicants EVERY YEAR says your theory isn't happening yet. I met a bunch of dudes from California this year - new to Utah and ready to kill.


I do think hunter numbers will go down. I think the same phenomena we have seen nationwide will eventually hit utah, especially with our slow urbanization. I think the increases in total applicants will slowly start to get less and less. Only time will tell.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Why? Just.. because they didn't draw?


Because they paid for the increased opportunity by buying a bonus point. They are entitled because they paid for it the advantage, not just "because they didn't draw".

If you disagree, then the state shouldn't have been selling points then all this time.

-DallanC


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

DallanC said:


> Because they paid for the increased opportunity by buying a bonus point. They are entitled because they paid for it the advantage, not just "because they didn't draw".
> 
> If you disagree, then the state shouldn't have been selling points then all this time.
> 
> -DallanC


Those are administrative fees, no fee was charged for a point ever in the state of Utah

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Some scary stuff:
https://www.outdoorlife.com/why-we-are-losing-hunters-and-how-to-fix-it/


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I wish I had more time to run the full on odds and probabilities of drawing but here is a dismal look at what we are up against.

How is this for an eye opener? 
I guarantee you my math is correct.

(sorry but the formatting takes out the spaces between columns.)
LE Deer total applicants, points, tags and "total entries".

Points Applicants Total entries(Points + current application)
26 0 0
25 1 26
24 1 25
23 9 208
22 37 815
21 76 1597
20 106 2121
19 199 3782
18 288 5185
17 433 7362
16 506 8097
15 656 9841
14 802 11229
13 936 12169
12 1184 14209
11 1388 15269
10 1770 17701
9 1875 16876
8 2115 16921
7 2236 15653
6 2396 14377
5 2537 12686
4 2853 11413
3 3169 9508
2 3913 7827
1 3933 3934
0 4203 4203 
======= ========
37622 Applicants 223034 Total entries

Number of people applying for LE deer: 37622
Number of actual drawing entries for
LE deer including the points: 223034
Number of tabs available for LE deer:	1471

This means that 223,034 people are in the draw for one of the 1471 tags.
I think I like everyone's chances better if it were 37622 people drawing 1471 tags. Even for the high point holders.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Those are administrative fees, no fee was charged for a point ever in the state of Utah
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


That is a somewhat accurate statement. The language used in the explanation of the point system and in the publication of draw and point results differs and can be construed legally as buying a point in one, whereas in others it is applying for a point. That can be battled out in court if some desire to go that route but, just know that a class action suit is not a rabbit hole anyone should to go down.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Even for the high point holders.


Do the math and compare how those highest point holders odds are now versus a random draw. If 50% of the tags are reserved for top points holders, how would their odds change if it were a full random draw?


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

MadHunter said:


> That is a somewhat accurate statement. The language used in the explanation of the point system and in the publication of draw and point results differs and can be construed legally as buying a point in one, whereas in others it is applying for a point. That can be battled out in court if some desire to go that route but, just know that a class action suit is not a rabbit hole anyone should to go down.


Interesting stuff.

Would your purchased point be more valuable than the gifted point for actually applying for a tag?

I could see a argument if your point cost was an additional fee.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Do the math and compare how those highest point holders odds are now versus a random draw. If 50% of the tags are reserved for top points holders, how would their odds change if it were a full random draw?


We should not be able to be entered into the max point draw and random. You can't beat out those that have equal points as you to bad, better luck next year.

Getting two chances to draw is over the line even for you entitlement pushers.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

weaversamuel76 said:


> Those are administrative fees, no fee was charged for a point ever in the state of Utah


I dont know how fees or money is used on the back end.

The draw clearly has an option to "purchase" a species point. DWR Emails even use the term "Purchase". I was required to pay money to get my points.

-DallanC


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

DallanC said:


> I dont know how fees or money is used on the back end.
> 
> The draw clearly has an option to "purchase" a species point. DWR Emails even use the term "Purchase". I was required to pay money to get my points.
> 
> -DallanC


See you court lol 
Hope saved your documents on which ones you purchased and which ones were free

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

weaversamuel76 said:


> See you court lol
> Hope saved your documents on which ones you purchased and which ones were free


Oh thats easy, I have records of nearly every draw going back to when they first started draws. Never got a "free" point. Always paid the required amount. I have every license and tag I ever got, and almost every proclamation going back to the 1980s. I thought that stuff was cool and just stick new stuff in the "pile" every year.

-DallanC


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I threw out a lot of my old stuff in the name of de-cluttering space and simplifying my life.
Sounds like You might be a hoarder Dallan. :smile:


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> Because they paid for the increased opportunity by buying a bonus point. They are entitled because they paid for it the advantage, not just "because they didn't draw".
> 
> If you disagree, then the state shouldn't have been selling points then all this time.
> 
> -DallanC


Most points are a reward for not drawing, and cost the same as the standard application fee. Even when you purchase them... The points have no explicit value. Go to court, I don't care.

You aren't ENTITLED to anything with those. Systems change. Just like Social security age has increased, they charge more tax, and will likely reduce benefits. I pay into it, but doubt I ever see it.

Tell you what. Everyone keeps their points as they are now. No additional points are rewarded. They get one entry for each point. Once points are gone they are gone.

Boom.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Just like Social security age has increased, they charge more tax, and will likely reduce benefits. I pay into it, but doubt I ever see it.


If SS were bankrupt tomorrow it will still pay out. IDK why people think they wont get anything, that clearly isnt the case. It will pay out based on a percentage of whats taken in by taxes, which is around 70% to 80% of current payments.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dont-believe-this-myth-about-social-security-2019-04-23

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> If SS were bankrupt tomorrow it will still pay out. IDK why people think they wont get anything, that clearly isnt the case. It will pay out based on a percentage of whats taken in by taxes, which is around 70% to 80% of current payments.
> 
> https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dont-believe-this-myth-about-social-security-2019-04-23
> 
> -DallanC


Like I said, unless you increase payout age (they have), taxes (they have), and decrease benefit amounts.. it won't be good.



> "Costs are expected to exceed income next year for the first time since 1982, and will likely continue to overshadow income as more older Americans retire. Still, the year in which the funds would run out was pushed to 2035 from last year's estimate of 2034, according to the report. "


It would only be a 30% reduction for CURRENT retirees. The inflow vs outflow will continue to grow. Life expectancy goes up, and less goes in than out. It will be like every other government program - running a deficit. 


> Current retirees should estimate how much a 20% to 30% reduction


Let's take 30% of everyone's points away and start there to fix point creep lol.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

weaversamuel76 said:


> We should not be able to be entered into the max point draw and random. You can't beat out those that have equal points as you to bad, better luck next year.
> 
> Getting two chances to draw is over the line even for you entitlement pushers.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


I'm not sure what you are saying. I'm not asking that anyone get two chances to draw. I am asking if someone's odds would be better as a max point holder or if that person were in a completely random draw. I have a hard time believing that the maximum point holders--who are given 50% of all the tags--don't have higher odds than they would if the draw were completely random. Do the math and figure it out.

I don't want the bonus point system to EVER go away. Cap the points if you want a change. But, I believe those standing in line the longest should be given the best chance of drawing. Call it entitlement or whatever you want. Just don't go to a random draw!


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> I don't want the bonus point system to EVER go away. Cap the points if you want a change. But, I believe those standing in line the longest should be given the best chance of drawing. Call it entitlement or whatever you want. Just don't go to a random draw!


I believe that the state over indulges the upper portion of thier pyramid scheme. It's ok to disagree

Don't worry the current system helps drive the auction system of funding SFW so it's not going anywhere any time soon.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Just out of curiosity, do you go to the sportsman's expo? Do you try to draw those auction tags?

I hear many decry those auction tags--myself included--but many of those same people--not myself--participate in that expo and put in for those tags. They love that minute chance that expo gives them of drawing.

Anyway, explain how the current system helps drive the auction. I am not sure I understand your point. I think the expo will exist and the auction will exist to the same extent with our current bonus point system or with a full random draw. Change my opinion...I'm all ears.


----------



## weaversamuel76 (Feb 16, 2017)

wyoming2utah said:


> Just out of curiosity, do you go to the sportsman's expo? Do you try to draw those auction tags?
> 
> I hear many decry those auction tags--myself included--but many of those same people--not myself--participate in that expo and put in for those tags. They love that minute chance that expo gives them of drawing.
> 
> Anyway, explain how the current system helps drive the auction. I am not sure I understand your point. I think the expo will exist and the auction will exist to the same extent with our current bonus point system or with a full random draw. Change my opinion...I'm all ears.


You correct the expo isn't going away and as hunting license sales decline they will take more and more auction tags in the name of conservation.

I was a boycott advocate for long time now I attend. My absence wasn't noticed and game didn't change. I even attended the auction and bid on a tag alas I failed to run with the big money guys. Now I decry the game but play because it's the only game in town.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## hard luck hunter (Aug 24, 2020)

I had 52 before finally drawing an early rifle elk tag for the Boulders with 25 points this year. Next highest point total is 20 for desert bighorn.


----------

