This is perhaps THE most important thing for an NR to understand about AZ sheep draw. Incredibly embarrassing for a “hunting advice” company to get this wrong.
Top rut moved into OnX search tools
- Thread starter Gila
- Start date
Thanks for your continued feedback on this everyone. I just saw these comments and am talking with the engineering team today about them to see what we can surface and figure out.
As for the Utah Deer issue, this is a known hole in our data and we will have it in the tool in the future, but for now anyone that selects Utah and Deer in the filters does get a notification that pops up directing you to this page: https://www.onxmaps.com/hunt/utah-deer-odds-general-limited-dedicated-hunter which does have the general deer draw data in spreadsheet format, a temporary solution until this data is in the tool and users can select multiple variations of deer in the points manager section. At this time we do not have Dedicated Deer odds unfortunately but also hope to in the future. I'll look into the NV issues you mention as well, some of this data for specific bag types may not be in our dataset today but I'll look into it and confirm that's the issue on why it's missing in the points manager.
As for the AZ sheep odds issue on units with only 1 tag concerning Non-Resident odds, we are looking into this now, thanks for calling it out.
We are also looking at this issue where our data around tag quota may be different from the state website to try to understand this. We get our data directly from the state, not from their website, so we'll do some cross referencing here and see what we can find out.
Thanks again for this feedback, its valuable and we truly do want to make this tool the best one available, so your input helps.
As always if you want to talk through some of these issues or offer feedback directly to me please reach out, happy to email or hop on a video call and talk through any issues you see with the product.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
As for the Utah Deer issue, this is a known hole in our data and we will have it in the tool in the future, but for now anyone that selects Utah and Deer in the filters does get a notification that pops up directing you to this page: https://www.onxmaps.com/hunt/utah-deer-odds-general-limited-dedicated-hunter which does have the general deer draw data in spreadsheet format, a temporary solution until this data is in the tool and users can select multiple variations of deer in the points manager section. At this time we do not have Dedicated Deer odds unfortunately but also hope to in the future. I'll look into the NV issues you mention as well, some of this data for specific bag types may not be in our dataset today but I'll look into it and confirm that's the issue on why it's missing in the points manager.
As for the AZ sheep odds issue on units with only 1 tag concerning Non-Resident odds, we are looking into this now, thanks for calling it out.
We are also looking at this issue where our data around tag quota may be different from the state website to try to understand this. We get our data directly from the state, not from their website, so we'll do some cross referencing here and see what we can find out.
Thanks again for this feedback, its valuable and we truly do want to make this tool the best one available, so your input helps.
As always if you want to talk through some of these issues or offer feedback directly to me please reach out, happy to email or hop on a video call and talk through any issues you see with the product.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
Check your GoHunt account (LMK if you need my buddy’s PW) and you will see how they zero out the odds for all the 1 tag ram units when residency = NR.
And I’m no GoHunt fan, they have a lot of problems also. And, they are a problem themselves.
But GoHunt handles this AZ ram issue correctly. And don’t have near the laundry list of problems as above. They don’t send you to an XLS to review data that should be integrated in to the tool itself.
Thank you all again for this feedback. I’ve read through it all and talked with the team working on this product and wanted to get back to you as soon as I could. There were three main issues I saw that you guys were bringing up, so I’ve tried to organize this into those three buckets. Please let me know if I missed anything.
#1 - NR Arizona sheep odds:
It was mentioned we were showing this data incorrectly when only one tag was available, I think what was mentioned was that non-residents are not able to draw a sheep tag when there is only one sheep tag available for a hunt, and we were showing >0% odds for non residents in these one tag scenarios.
We went and scoured our site and cannot find any non-resident hunts where this is the case in the tool unfortunately. When you add or remove residency you’ll get different results in our tool that are specific to your profile. Here’s a quick video showing those hunts with 1 tag which residents can get, and how they do not appear for non-resident searches, and on the unit pages there are no non-resident odds or data for these single tag hunts. Have a watch: https://www.loom.com/share/e79052cb11af426ba911b7790a8e70d5?sid=9db03c2a-e1b8-47e1-914b-a55d64152c73. Please let me know if I misunderstood and send over a specific example where you are seeing a 1 tag hunt with NR draw odds or data at >0%.
#2 - Inaccurate Data:
It was mentioned that some of our data is inaccurate and not matching with the state PDFs for example unit 16a desert bighorn sheep in AZ. Someone in this thread mentioned that we were showing 200 first choice Resident applicants when there were only 172 TOTAL first choice applicant in 2024 from the game and fish website.
Arizona applicants get 5 hunt choices on a single application (species-specific) and in AZ both the 1st and 2nd choices are considered when an applicant is drawn before they move on to the next applicant. Hunters can can draw their second choice if their first choice is unavailable and the second choice has tags remaining. So to get accurate odds, we sum the 1st and 2nd choice applicants for each hunt to get a total that is statistically representative. In theory, the annual sum of applicants shown in our unit pages should match the combined total of 1st and 2nd choice applicants reported in Arizona’s official PDF however we see differences a lot, and we’ve seen these difference in some competitors data and charts as well.
Let’s use hunt number 6014 as an example
Why the difference? There are a few possibilities. The state may not be sending complete or entirely accurate application data. We do not use the state PDFs for our data models, we get raw data sent to us in CSVs directly from the state agency and have to clean and process that data. Also, group applications may be counted as 1 application in the raw data, but maybe the state counts each individual in the group in their numbers. The state may also be incorrectly summarizing values in their publicly released PDFs. We have reached out to our contacts at the AZFGD and have asked and we’ll report back. Sorry for this confusion but thank you for pointing this out, and we’ll get to the bottom of it.
#3 - Points Manager Issues:
The feedback here was around the two different pools of deer points in Utah, and that Nevada is another state that has logic issues with antlered and antlerless elk, or Depredation elk and so on.
We are currently pulling some of these hunts out of the tool and adding the correct data and point types to spreadsheets we’ll publish for users to utilize until we can get the correct point types added to our points manager. We’ve done this in the past for Wyoming Non-Resident Elk, New Mexico Outfitter hunts, and Utah General Deer. This work will include providing these spreadhsheets for Wyoming Non-Resident Deer and Antelope, as well as Nevada Antlerless Elk and Spike/Depredation Elk, as well as Antelope (Horns Shorter Than Ears). I know there are unique point types for Antlerless and Depredation Deer as well as Ewe Desert Sheep, but we don’t have those hunts in the tool today, so as we add those in the future we will add those point categories as well. It takes time to add all species and points so there’s still plenty of these bag types that need to be added to our dataset. Here’s a quick video showing our solution for some of these hunt types that are not currently showing up in the tool or currently showing up incorrectly based on point types (this will be fixed). Have a watch: https://www.loom.com/share/820ee07365134e70b499ff702f1e0f0c?sid=b9d0eca1-df84-451b-bcca-e05a140d4241
As always if you want to talk through some of these issues or offer feedback directly, please reach out. I'm happy to email or hop on a video call and talk through any issues you see with the product. Thanks for your feedback everyone.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
#1 - NR Arizona sheep odds:
It was mentioned we were showing this data incorrectly when only one tag was available, I think what was mentioned was that non-residents are not able to draw a sheep tag when there is only one sheep tag available for a hunt, and we were showing >0% odds for non residents in these one tag scenarios.
We went and scoured our site and cannot find any non-resident hunts where this is the case in the tool unfortunately. When you add or remove residency you’ll get different results in our tool that are specific to your profile. Here’s a quick video showing those hunts with 1 tag which residents can get, and how they do not appear for non-resident searches, and on the unit pages there are no non-resident odds or data for these single tag hunts. Have a watch: https://www.loom.com/share/e79052cb11af426ba911b7790a8e70d5?sid=9db03c2a-e1b8-47e1-914b-a55d64152c73. Please let me know if I misunderstood and send over a specific example where you are seeing a 1 tag hunt with NR draw odds or data at >0%.
#2 - Inaccurate Data:
It was mentioned that some of our data is inaccurate and not matching with the state PDFs for example unit 16a desert bighorn sheep in AZ. Someone in this thread mentioned that we were showing 200 first choice Resident applicants when there were only 172 TOTAL first choice applicant in 2024 from the game and fish website.
Arizona applicants get 5 hunt choices on a single application (species-specific) and in AZ both the 1st and 2nd choices are considered when an applicant is drawn before they move on to the next applicant. Hunters can can draw their second choice if their first choice is unavailable and the second choice has tags remaining. So to get accurate odds, we sum the 1st and 2nd choice applicants for each hunt to get a total that is statistically representative. In theory, the annual sum of applicants shown in our unit pages should match the combined total of 1st and 2nd choice applicants reported in Arizona’s official PDF however we see differences a lot, and we’ve seen these difference in some competitors data and charts as well.
Let’s use hunt number 6014 as an example
- In Arizona’s PDF, the sum of 1st and 2nd choice applicants = 408
- In the HRT unit page, the total shown = 388
Why the difference? There are a few possibilities. The state may not be sending complete or entirely accurate application data. We do not use the state PDFs for our data models, we get raw data sent to us in CSVs directly from the state agency and have to clean and process that data. Also, group applications may be counted as 1 application in the raw data, but maybe the state counts each individual in the group in their numbers. The state may also be incorrectly summarizing values in their publicly released PDFs. We have reached out to our contacts at the AZFGD and have asked and we’ll report back. Sorry for this confusion but thank you for pointing this out, and we’ll get to the bottom of it.
#3 - Points Manager Issues:
The feedback here was around the two different pools of deer points in Utah, and that Nevada is another state that has logic issues with antlered and antlerless elk, or Depredation elk and so on.
We are currently pulling some of these hunts out of the tool and adding the correct data and point types to spreadsheets we’ll publish for users to utilize until we can get the correct point types added to our points manager. We’ve done this in the past for Wyoming Non-Resident Elk, New Mexico Outfitter hunts, and Utah General Deer. This work will include providing these spreadhsheets for Wyoming Non-Resident Deer and Antelope, as well as Nevada Antlerless Elk and Spike/Depredation Elk, as well as Antelope (Horns Shorter Than Ears). I know there are unique point types for Antlerless and Depredation Deer as well as Ewe Desert Sheep, but we don’t have those hunts in the tool today, so as we add those in the future we will add those point categories as well. It takes time to add all species and points so there’s still plenty of these bag types that need to be added to our dataset. Here’s a quick video showing our solution for some of these hunt types that are not currently showing up in the tool or currently showing up incorrectly based on point types (this will be fixed). Have a watch: https://www.loom.com/share/820ee07365134e70b499ff702f1e0f0c?sid=b9d0eca1-df84-451b-bcca-e05a140d4241
As always if you want to talk through some of these issues or offer feedback directly, please reach out. I'm happy to email or hop on a video call and talk through any issues you see with the product. Thanks for your feedback everyone.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
Bbell12
WKR
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2018
- Messages
- 380
Glad you’re reading this thread, hope you guys bring back the top rut format.
As to AZ sheep, I think OnX caused the confusion with the vaguely titled column “tags given”.
tags given to who and by what method?
I think you are showing total tags given to the residency of the person logged in.
It vaguely said tags given: “1”.
And the NR above likely read that and said, that’s a 1 tag unit, so my odds should be zero.
I would label columns clearly.
Total Tags Given to Residents
Total tags given to Non Residents
Total tags given to max point holder by preference
Total tags given randomly.
tags given to who and by what method?
I think you are showing total tags given to the residency of the person logged in.
It vaguely said tags given: “1”.
And the NR above likely read that and said, that’s a 1 tag unit, so my odds should be zero.
I would label columns clearly.
Total Tags Given to Residents
Total tags given to Non Residents
Total tags given to max point holder by preference
Total tags given randomly.
wapitibob
WKR
Off line maps for the web map. Please
Thanks for this @Zzyzx you are right this could be more clear, this is total quota, and we will look into making the column headers more clear, as well as if you are looking at resident or non-resident data based on your profile selections at all times. Great suggestions and thank you.
We have made table view the default view now so it's much more like the Toprut format, and for people that liked the List + Map view you can easily get to that via the red button in the upper right hand corner. Thanks for the comment.
Reach out to every other state too because I have yet to find a single hunt code that y’all’s numbers match the state’s and that’s across the board. From New Mexico Antelope to Arizona Bighorn to Colorado Moose they’re all wrong and sometimes by a hundred or more tags issued. Not to mention that (at least for New Mexico elk) some of the hunt codes listed in the HRT don’t even exist within the state’s data. So a guy could do all his research on HRT and switch over to actually apply only to find that the hunt codes he picked out on HRT aren’t (and never were) on the list with the state.
Also, the “hunters per square mile” should calculate for every tag issued for the open season in the unit, not just that hunt code. If there are 40 bull tags but also 80 cow tags and 40 spike tags and 8 youth tags and 15 landowner tags for one unit in one season, they should all be counted towards that metric, not just the one type of tag you apply for.
@alexnelon Thanks for note. We did hunt pressure this way based on direct competition a hunter may have based on the tag you have in your pocket for any single hunt within a unit. We know there may be other pressure out in the woods (hunters, hikers, bikers, OHVs...), but those are a bit harder to aggregate and compile. If you have a bull tag, a cow hunter is not your direct competition, although they may be in the woods pushing animals around, but they have a different bag type so that's part of the reason we built that metric they way we did. We are looking at a secondary hunt pressure score in the future to include all species tags/hunters potentially on the landscape.
As for your first issue, can you send me specific examples where the data is not aligning? The state may be posting total quota and we break quota apart based on residency, so what you are seeing in the results are the numbers for your residency type, to get the full quota you'd have to look at both resident and non-resident numbers and sum them (look at a hunt with your residency set to that specific state, then go into your profile and remove that residency and you'll see two differing quota numbers). Without looking at specific examples I assume this may be the issue. Potentially we should add or update this column to total quota/quota based on residency so users can see both numbers side by side rather than just the relevant residency based ones. Maybe this will help with some of this confusion.
As for hunt codes issue you mention, some states like NM and AZ change a lot of codes annually, so if you are looking at the 2025 regs book they will differ from the data in our tool which is based on the 2024 draw. For those states you should look at the unit and bag type you intend to apply for and find that same unit and bag type in HRT since the codes a lot of times won't line up. This issue only happens in a few states that change hunt codes from year to year. This same issue happens when a unit splits or new hunts are added for a new year, we won't have that data in our tool until the following year when at least one draw has happened with those new hunts listed by the state. We know this is a bit confusing that our data is always a year behind the current regs, but our odds are based on the last draw to take place (this is the most accurate way to calculate odds) which was 2024 in this case. We are looking into helping with this misunderstanding though and for ways to present this more clearly in the future.
Thanks again and please feel free to reach out to me personally, I'd be happy to hop on a call and hear your feedback or suggestions if you're interested.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
As for your first issue, can you send me specific examples where the data is not aligning? The state may be posting total quota and we break quota apart based on residency, so what you are seeing in the results are the numbers for your residency type, to get the full quota you'd have to look at both resident and non-resident numbers and sum them (look at a hunt with your residency set to that specific state, then go into your profile and remove that residency and you'll see two differing quota numbers). Without looking at specific examples I assume this may be the issue. Potentially we should add or update this column to total quota/quota based on residency so users can see both numbers side by side rather than just the relevant residency based ones. Maybe this will help with some of this confusion.
As for hunt codes issue you mention, some states like NM and AZ change a lot of codes annually, so if you are looking at the 2025 regs book they will differ from the data in our tool which is based on the 2024 draw. For those states you should look at the unit and bag type you intend to apply for and find that same unit and bag type in HRT since the codes a lot of times won't line up. This issue only happens in a few states that change hunt codes from year to year. This same issue happens when a unit splits or new hunts are added for a new year, we won't have that data in our tool until the following year when at least one draw has happened with those new hunts listed by the state. We know this is a bit confusing that our data is always a year behind the current regs, but our odds are based on the last draw to take place (this is the most accurate way to calculate odds) which was 2024 in this case. We are looking into helping with this misunderstanding though and for ways to present this more clearly in the future.
Thanks again and please feel free to reach out to me personally, I'd be happy to hop on a call and hear your feedback or suggestions if you're interested.
Paul Ronto ([email protected]) - onX Hunt Product Manager
I'll do 3 quickly. Colorado Rifle, unit 500, state data per hunt code.
1st rifle - Total quota: 75 - Res issued: 44 - Nonres issued: 15 - Res Youth: 2 - Landowner: 14
2nd rifle - Total quota: 80 - Res issued: 50 - Nonres issued: 18 - Res Youth: 5 - Landowner: 7
3rd rifle - Total quota: 35 - Res issued: 23 - Nonres issued: 5 - Res Youth: 2 - Landowner: 5
HRT Data for each one.
1st rifle - Tags given: 26
2nd rifle - Tags given: 28
3rd rifle - Tags given: 12
My only guess is that y'all are lumping in secondary draw and returned tags in with your draw data which is terrible and needs to be separated. Nobody wants to see primary and secondary draw data mixed together.
Tim Steinmetz
FNG
@onX Hunt Thank you for contributing to this thread and taking our feedback seriously. The Research Tools platform is much improved from what it was in my original frustrated post. The new filtering sliders eliminated the clutter issue of tags I am overqualified for. The main filtered list now resembles the Toprut platform, and the unit-specific pages more closely resemble the GoHunt platform. I did sign up with a GoHunt membership for now, but if the OnX engineers can continue working through the bugs and details which are still being discussed above, I will probably drop my GoHunt membership before it renews next year. GoHunt is still the more powerful hunt research platform, but for me the Research Tools platform is starting to seem good enough to not necessitate an additional $150 annual membership for GoHunt, just like Toprut always was before.
I'll dive in and have a look at this, but to note we are not lumping the secondary or returned tags into the primary data, so I'll talk to the engineers and try to get an answer on this discrepancy. Thanks for the details.
UPDATE 6/26/25 (10:35 am MST) - I think where the confusion is here is that in HRT the "Tags Given" column is the total quota available to that residency type, and you are comparing that to the actual tags issues data from the state. These are two different things, we are showing how many total tags are available for a hunt code (and it's unique for res vs non-res in the tool), we are not showing how many tags were issued the previous year. I think the confusion here is in the title of the column as "Tags Given" and should maybe read "Total Quota". Thanks again for point out this bit of confusion, we'll work to make that more clear.
I'll talk to our writers and see where this bullet point on our content pages came from and update, thanks for the notice.
UPDATE 6/26/25 (10:40 am MST) - I talked with our copy writing team and they've updated that blog post to reflect the correct 90/10 split. Thanks for pointing out this error.
Thanks for the comment here. We'll continue to improve this tool during the hunting season in preparation for the 2026 application season. Thanks for the comments and feedback. I'd love to chat about what we're missing that you still rely on other tools for. If you're willing to talk on a call for a few minutes let me know. Thanks! [email protected]. Cheers!
wapitibob
WKR
Thanks for fixing this.
Featured Video
Latest Articles
- Swarovski EL Range 12×42 TA Binocular Review
- Battle of the 2.0s: Seek Outside Cimarron vs Redcliff Floorless Shelters
- Quiet Kat Ranger XR Review
- Shoot2Hunt A Female Perspective
- Goodbye 270 WSM, Hello 6UM
- 2025 Head-to-Head Bow Test
- Sitka Ascent Pants Review
- TT#59 Wesley Warner Stalking Big Mule Deer Bucks
- South Cox: Big Bucks Under 20 Yards
- TT#58 Scouting Mature Bucks with Brad Carter