Corb & Scott,
I know you don’t like PP, and I don’t either when you can’t burn them up in 5-7 years, after that I think it’s a waste. Anyways..
How do you think Idaho’s system of 1 of the big 3, or all 3 (Deer, elk, pronghorn) could be implemented into a current points system to help the creep issue? Would that at all be helpful?
Ie: you couldn’t gain a point for every species every year, but only one point total.
In my mind I think this could help, but certainly open to others ideas. Say a state tried to transition out of a BS preference point system- declared everyone can only build 1 point total per year, then declared their points were turning into BP for a period of time (like the example of Grand Canyon permits above) and then went random.
I’ve had a stupid long day so not thinking clearly.
I’m personally not against point systems as it allows people to plan a little better -as long as the turn over in the top points holders happens in within 5-7 years, and I think Idaho’s “pick one” has a lot of good going for it, I also think a system like Colorado’s hybrid draw for goats could be a useful methodology for elk, deer, pronghorn draws . And implementing them both would be even better.
Say for instance the most desirable buck and bull tags (permit areas with 25 or less- just a number) were all random. As are moose, sheep, goat. And then a hybrid draw for the rest of pronghorn, deer and elk- if no OTC opportunity exists.
In my own echo chamber I like it, but tear it up fellas.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am going to preface this that I am bias because I absolutely loath point systems. I generally call points participation trophies because that's all I really view them as. The likelihood of my opinion changing on this is slim.
The system that you are describing, if I understand you correctly is basically what Utah has. Utah is a hybrid preference where its a 50/50 split of tags. Half go to the top point holders and half are in a random draw. It helps to give people opportunity every year. As a resident, you can either choose to gain points for limited entry elk or limited entry deer or limited entry antelope and one of the once in a lifetimes. You can get a point for general season deer each year as well. So, you can gain 3 points a year in Utah total. So while not exactly like you described but similar that you can only gain one point per "type" of hunt/tag (not sure what the proper term here is).
Now, I like the method of forcing people to choose. So if Utah went to a random draw but kept its units and management the same. I would say that you could only apply for limited entry elk or limited entry deer or antelope. You would also only be able to apply for one of the once in a lifetime tags each year. I am not opposed to making people choose.
If you are dead set on keeping a point system, I think that bonus point systems are the best. It still gives people a chance every year with those that have applied longer, more chances.
If you want to keep a preference point system, don't allow people to turn back tags and you cant just buy points. This would force people to apply and hunt if they draw. Most states are finding out how common it has been for people to turn back tags and are finding ways to mitigate this, so hopefully that helps. Utah found out that a guy had drawn a limited entry deer tag for ~5 years in a row and turned it back the day before the hunt all of those years. Because it was so late, they couldn't reissue the tag, so that was 5 people that could have made it through the system that didn't.
I hate points systems, I have made my opinion on them perfectly clear. It is also nothing more than my opinion. Nor am I complaining about them, I just don't like them.
My number one issue with point systems, specifically preference points is that people get their points and then feel like they are owed something. As people get more and more points, they expect a tag and that tag better meet their expectations. We saw this in Utah a couple years ago with a certain buffalo hunt. They also did it with an elk unit as well. People complained that it was taking 15 points to draw an elk tag and they were only killing 320" bulls and that if it takes that long to draw a tag, you should get a better bull. So the solution? Cut tags to raise the age class and now it takes even longer to draw a tag.
My second reason is that as people get more and more points they feel like the same rules should apply as when they started. Utah needs to stop killing elk at their most vulnerable time with our most effective weapons but every time you bring that up there is a crowd that complains because when they started applying, it was this way and it should stay that way. I have been told countless times by people that "they can change anything they want after I get my tag." The part that makes me laugh about that is 99% of that comes from a specific generation that likes to bitch about another generation but that's a different topic.
Someone said it earlier, there is no solution to make it "fair" for everyone. Someone will always lose no matter what system is put in place. Personally, I would rather take my chances in a random draw every year than have a "guarantee" at the end. I put guarantee in quotes because nothing in life is guaranteed. There is no solution to mitigate the fact that demand for tags is out weighing the supply and its not going to get better. Take advantage of whatever is available now, it wont be there forever.
