Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44
  1. Default Would you give up your points?

    I have often thought about this and then I heard Randy mention it on a podcast. How many of you would gladly give up all your pts in a state if that state went back to just a random no pts draw? Everyone is on the same page every year. The more I think about it the more this should be looked at. And I am pretty deep into the pts game in a lot of states but it is really BS the more a guy thinks about it. All it is, is a cash grab for states. Maybe most states would go to requiring you to purchase a license to apply to make up for lost point money and have to foot the whole tag cost when you apply. That would be fine I feel as it would keep people from putting, mom, gma,gpa amd uncle rico in just to try and get one of them to draw a tag. Not looking for an argument just seeing what other people feel. As I think eventually people will get sick of the pt game and start demanding something different.

  2. #2

    Default

    Count me in, but I think I only have about 60-70 points built up throughout the various states.

  3. #3

    Default

    Yep.

    But good luck getting state game agencies to give up the cash those points bring in.
    get over it commies..
    JWP58

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Due West of Paradise Lost
    Posts
    23

    Default

    My two cents on the matter would be..... Yes, get rid of the points systems entirely.

    But the issue is as contentious as "Trump Politics" in different folk's eyes. I am writing my response from a hunter who doesn't have that many points in the two other states I apply for. Compared to others I read about on the Forum. I live here in Montana.

    My wife and I have lifetime resident licenses from our two years as residents in Idaho. And apply yearly for special draw units for elk and deer. No luck since I left the state. Isn't Idaho one of the only states in the west without a point system? I read on the forum of other hunters having many points from many years of applying towards that ultimate goal of being successful in a top Unit in other States. Gotta respect their perseverance and serious focus. And I'm sure that is one of the valid arguments for a point system. Some would say it brings out the very serious hunters for a Species.

    Seems like simple statistical calculations would lay out how this system has eventually lead to where many folks find themselves today. And the different "gyrations" the different states use with their individual point system programs. Perhaps I'm wrong but I sense a mindset in some circles with some species and states of.... "I'm applying yearly and have a good chance of a tag in fifteen years". Somewhat a generalization, I know. A lot can happen in those fifteen years. Just saying.

    Point systems sure can get folks looking for an edge.... I recently read of the Arizona Hunting/Booking Agent who was convicted and found guilty of "falsely" establishing residency in Utah for a Sheep permit. He had like 21 points or so as I remember? Of course with being a Utah "resident" he was in a better pool for a tag. And what do ya know... He got one. Shot a great ram. I guess headed back to Arizona. Then Utah started checking out his activities.

    Here in Montana my wife and I had a good number of points with some different species. We were out of the State for five years. With most of that a very long ways away. For a number of reasons we did not apply each year as non-residents. Certainly our choice. But upon returning home here we "lost" all those points. I guess now that situation has been changed that you never lose them. But doesn't help us.
    What Once Were All the Plains of God....Are Now All Just Common Real Estate....

  5. #5

    Default

    I have very few points accumulated, but I would feel for the folks who are near max points and suddenly have them not matter. The bonus point system seems like a good compromise to me.

  6. #6

    Default

    Would also be in favor of more states making moose, sheep, and mtn goat once in a lifetime. I may never draw any big three licenses, but I know I'm waiting in line behind hundreds of people trying to draw their second moose and sheep in Wyo.

  7. #7

    Default

    I feel like if you are going to go from a point system to no points you would have to grandfather people out... if that is a thing... For example Colorado could give all point holders bonus points and then say you can no longer build points.

  8. #8

    Default

    I don't know if I would prefer points vs. no points, but I'll one thing positive about points, at least in Wyoming, it let's you plan.

    By building up points I reach a point where I'm pretty sure I will draw. That lets me plan ahead with fair confidence with regard to when I will or will not be available for other things (like work). But more importantly, it allows me to NOT apply in other places or for other species. Buying points lets me count on going on elking this fall and I won't worry about putting in for another state or species and then have to worry that I might actually draw more than one tag.

    For Randy, maybe he can't have too many tags. But I can only afford the one trip, the single freezer for the meat and the time to hunt one animal out of state. Call me nuts but that's the way it is. The point system really helps me manage that much better and without worrying about doubling up with tags I can't use.

  9. #9

    Default

    I think a lot more opportunity would open up if sheep, goat, moose and bison tags became a once in a lifetime national tag. I.e. irrespective of which state you draw in once you harvest it that's you done. States make a lot less money but at least more people would hey that opportunity.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    1,791

    Default

    Nope, I like points.

  11. Default

    The best idea is to get rid of the points schemes all together. For those with points, let the points increase thier odds until they draw out and get back to random draw.

    Then if you wanted a system to spread the out those who are lucky and get tags, have a predefined waiting period for that species after you draw. For example...

    A low demand tag, when you draw you can apply and draw the following year. For a little better tag you wait 2 years before being eligible to have a tag for that species again, for really high demand tag, maybe you give up opportunity for that species for 5 or longer???

    I would love a straight random system, but if we want to spread the tags out, make mandatory wait periods after a successful draw.

  12. Default

    The biggest problem would be how to graciously phase out the current systems. In CO, they have instituted the "hybrid draw" in response to point creep. It's a start:

    "Hunters who normally would not
    have enough preference points to draw
    these licenses now have a slight chance
    to draw a small number of the most
    coveted licenses through this process."

    Perhaps in the long term, they will increase the tags available to the hybrid system and decrease the tags available to the points system.

    Aussie, I think that is a decent idea. Seems unlikely because the people of each State own the wildlife. On the other hand, there are inter-State agreements on some things like poachers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inters...olator_Compact so maybe not impossible. Not trying to equate Big 3 hunters to poachers, just an example of multi State agreements.

  13. #13

    Default

    COEngineer,
    I believe New Mexico phased out of the points system, so there might be a model for you.

    More importantly, most Hook and Bullet state departments are no longer funded on tax dollars and need to live on permit and preference point revenues. There will be a serious jack in tag prices, the likes of which we have never seen, if the points systems was dropped.

  14. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrentD View Post
    COEngineer,
    I believe New Mexico phased out of the points system, so there might be a model for you.

    More importantly, most Hook and Bullet state departments are no longer funded on tax dollars and need to live on permit and preference point revenues. There will be a serious jack in tag prices, the likes of which we have never seen, if the points systems was dropped.
    I have only ever applied in CO, so my knowledge is limited. Anyone have a short synopsis of how it happened in NM?

    Good point about the revenue. Has NM seen huge price increases since they stopped?

  15. #15

    Default

    I wouldn't mind if they all went to random, but I wouldn't be willing to just give up my points. Some people have a ton of money invested in points, so something would have to be done to transition to a totally random system. At worse, they could make everyone's existing points turn into bonus points that wouldn't accumulate. There would still be a lot of pissed off people though.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Lamb View Post
    Yep.

    But good luck getting state game agencies to give up the cash those points bring in.
    What if there was a nonrefundable application fee in the same amount as the points?
    "The mountains are calling and I must go." - John Muir

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Elk View Post
    What if there was a nonrefundable application fee in the same amount as the points?
    Can hunters pay that all at one time? the points system is sort of like a built in savings plan. And I would guess a sizeable percentage of those savings are never cashed in by hunters who give up, die, or get too old to hunt or interested in something else. Lots of Wyoming elk tags would jump to more than $2,000. That's a bundle out of pocket at one time.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Elk View Post
    What if there was a nonrefundable application fee in the same amount as the points?
    I think we're reaching the tipping points on a lot of what hunters will gladly pay for the privilege of hunting out of state. We can look at all sorts of alternative funding models to ensure everyone pays for wildlife management, rather than just hunters, anglers, shooters and gear guys. Several states have either adopted new models of funding or are looking at them. It's been a sleeper issue - agency funding models - for as long as I can remember. Yet every time we get close, the myopia appears and we shoot ourselves in the feet.
    get over it commies..
    JWP58

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Lamb View Post
    I think we're reaching the tipping points on a lot of what hunters will gladly pay for the privilege of hunting out of state. We can look at all sorts of alternative funding models to ensure everyone pays for wildlife management, rather than just hunters, anglers, shooters and gear guys.
    When that happens, hunters will be not just a minority, but a very small minority, and that is a huge game changer (in a not so good way). Be careful what you wish for.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrentD View Post
    When that happens, hunters will be not just a minority, but a very small minority, and that is a huge game changer (in a not so good way). Be careful what you wish for.
    Most game agencies receive relatively little funding from resident hunters. They get the majority of license revenue from non-residents. That pool is not one that is as easily impacted by the usual trials and tribulations of the DIY local hunter since they have more expendable income, etc.

    Wildlife is a public trust. It is owned by no-one and held in trust for all citizens. All citizens currently have a right to influence how those animals are managed through various public processes, yet only hunters truly put in to the wildlife agency mix (with a tip of the hat to sport shooters who don't hunt yet spend crazy money on ammo & guns).

    I wish for well funded agencies that manage wildlife with an eye towards the resource first, and our sport second. I don't see the paranoia that comes with taking their funding, along similar lines to what AR has done.

    We set up the current model over 100 years ago when hunting was still a growing sport, when animal numbers were at all-time lows and habitat conservation was anathema to westward expansion. Now, as hunters once again decline due to lost access, etc, the conservation work needed, and the advocates necessary to maintain our land & wildlife grows. If we do not look for better solutions, we'll end up losing what our forefathers fought to bring back.

    It would be incredibly short-sighted of hunters not to ask for help when we need it.
    get over it commies..
    JWP58

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Bitterroot Valley, MT
    Posts
    1,157

    Default

    I have applied in several states for ten years now. I have lots wrapped up in them.

    I would give up preference points for bonus points (go from guaranteed to random).

    BUT, I would only do this if certain tags went to once in a lifetime as well (are you listening MT)?
    "There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness, that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy, and its charm." ~TR

    "He was a mighty hunter before the Lord." ~Genesis 10:9

  22. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Lamb View Post
    It would be incredibly short-sighted of hunters not to ask for help when we need it.
    Ben, the problem is that if we give non-hunters more "seats at the table," we might not like how they decide to manage wildlife. Look at how feral horses are out of control in NV, elk are being shot by paid sharp-shooters using night vision in Rocky Mountain National Park, etc.

    I want to like the idea of "animals first, hunters second," but I fear that if you take hunting away, there will be no user group vocal enough to preserve the wildlife. I believe that the United States has some of the best wildlife in the world and I know we have the most recreational (non-subsistence) hunters. I think the two are related.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by COEngineer View Post
    Ben, the problem is that if we give non-hunters more "seats at the table," we might not like how they decide to manage wildlife. Look at how feral horses are out of control in NV, elk are being shot by paid sharp-shooters using night vision in Rocky Mountain National Park, etc.

    I want to like the idea of "animals first, hunters second," but I fear that if you take hunting away, there will be no user group vocal enough to preserve the wildlife. I believe that the United States has some of the best wildlife in the world and I know we have the most recreational (non-subsistence) hunters. I think the two are related.
    If I had a dollar for every person who has said this, I'd be able to buy one of the Wilke's ranches.
    get over it commies..
    JWP58

  24. #24

    Default

    I gave up points when I just moved to NM & no points here for years.
    Only gripe I have now is resident/non resident pool split & whole Outfitter welfare pool...,
    that & talk of resdents now wanting to take all the LO tags cause they are entitled to them.Just them.
    Good Luck with that. Good luck hunting private land with your tag then.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Elk Country, Colorado
    Posts
    2,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hank4elk View Post
    that & talk of resdents now wanting to take all the LO tags cause they are entitled to them.Just them.
    Can you expand on this? I hadn't heard anything about this yet?

    And yes, I would gladly give up my points.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •