We need to start lobbying for point system reform

[Fowl Play]

My opinion is definitely controversial and maybe total make believe at this point... but I have a different way to "fix" this problem. Problem is demand, you are never going to fix that unless you can increase the supply. How would you increase the supply? You manage for hunter opportunity rather than trophy.

Reduce predator numbers, reduce B tags, keep all the herds at the upper end of sustainable numbers. Allow more hunters to harvest animals. Simple as that.

If you want to keep some areas "trophy" managed and let people play the game for that, great.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Points are not the problem. Too many people are the problem. It’s too easy to apply.

I’ve said this before, it’s a simple fix, front all tag and license money at the time of application and no credit cards. You shouldn’t be able to apply with money you don’t have. Draw odds would dramatically improve instantly.

Shit changed when Colorado went away from this system. I know it cost a lot in CC fees. Obvious answer is to refund tags to unsuccessful applicants less cc fees. Lots of ways to do it, but with the money CPW is making I don’t know that they’re going to change in a way that benefits hunters.

 

[MattB]

We seem to forget that ultimately, the folks who make these decisions work for us. The systems can and do change.

The issue is these sorts of threads are usually started by people who want to see reform in states they are not residents of. In that case, the folks who make the decisions don’t work for them and rightly should care little how they feel.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

I gotta say I do like how MT splits General and LE for non residents. It was confusing as hell when I first started hunting there as a NR, but it works out fairly well.

You always have a chance with bonus points for LE tags, and a general tag is fairly reliable as an every other year tag if you go PP. If you opt out of the PP system you still have decent odds of a tag as well.

 

[Ucsdryder]

My opinion is definitely controversial and maybe total make believe at this point... but I have a different way to "fix" this problem. Problem is demand, you are never going to fix that unless you can increase the supply. How would you increase the supply? You manage for hunter opportunity rather than trophy.

Reduce predator numbers, reduce B tags, keep all the herds at the upper end of sustainable numbers. Allow more hunters to harvest animals. Simple as that.

If you want to keep some areas "trophy" managed and let people play the game for that, great.

Already so many people in the woods in Colorado, increase that wouldn’t make for a good experience. Decrease the number of days per season and increase the number of seasons might be an option. 2 archery seasons, then 4-5 day rifle seasons with 2 days in between. This would work if Colorado decided they wanted to start limiting some technology in firearms. Now that’s a pipe dream!

 

[6mm Remington]

Moose, sheep, goat, and bison should be once in a lifetime. Montana's 7 year wait period is a joke. I personally know a person who waited the seven years after drawing and killing a huge ram. The very FIRST year he could put in again he drew another ram tag for a different district.

No making it once in a lifetime won't greatly increase your odds but it will at least give folks a resemblance of a chance to draw. I also know personally a guy in Montana who has drawn and killed 3 - THREE rams in Montana. They need to change that and give more people a chance.

 

[Fowl Play]

Already so many people in the woods in Colorado, increase that wouldn’t make for a good experience. Decrease the number of days per season and increase the number of seasons might be an option. 2 archery seasons, then 4-5 day rifle seasons with 2 days in between. This would work if Colorado decided they wanted to start limiting some technology in firearms. Now that’s a pipe dream!

I don't think increasing number of animals would increase number of hunters necessarily. But agree that another option is just create more seasons. Multiple ways to increase "supply" of hunts.

Most non-residents only can hunt 7-10 day chunks anyway. If you wanted to increase supply on the NR side. Make them choose their 10 day period, etc.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I gotta say I do like how MT splits General and LE for non residents. It was confusing as hell when I first started hunting there as a NR, but it works out fairly well.

You always have a chance with bonus points for LE tags, and a general tag is fairly reliable as an every other year tag if you go PP. If you opt out of the PP system you still have decent odds of a tag as well.

I hate it. Every hunter and their dog can put in for the premium units with no risk because they can keep their general tag if they don’t draw the LE.

When there is no risk you’ll increase applicants every single time.

 

[Ucsdryder]

What if…

3 preference point max.

Put in every year or lose your points. Solves the issue of CPW losing money for points.

Any tag for that species requires using all points, cow, leftover, turnback, etc.

Points go to max point holder, so if it’s unit 10 in Colorado, it would be a random draw for anybody with max points (3), but if you want to play that game you don’t get to pick up a cow or leftover unless you want to lose your points.

 

[IDVortex]

I hate it. Every hunter and their dog can put in for the premium units with no risk because they can keep their general tag if they don’t draw the LE.

When there is no risk you’ll increase applicants every single time.

I feel this way about OIL tags. I've known a couple guys who put in just because, but never really researched said hunts, and know their style of hunting. Doubtful they'd even harvest a goat or sheep. But they affected the odds for guys who really want one.

 

[SDHNTR]

We could also ban all hunting content from YT/FB/IG.

 

[IDVortex]

This would work if Colorado decided they wanted to start limiting some technology in firearms. Now that’s a pipe dream!

I can't remember the name of the bow, but the season could be long bow only, but the same poundage and size of the bows used back in the time frame of Genghis Khan, and must uses horses.
That would make it to where you'd have few hunters.

 

[IDVortex]

We could also ban all hunting content from YT/FB/IG.

Websites would just become the new thing. Even bigger than they are now.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

The issue is these sorts of threads are usually started by people who want to see reform in states they are not residents of. In that case, the folks who make the decisions don’t work for them and rightly should care little how they feel.

Wait, point creep doesn’t negatively affect residents? Most states with point systems have points for residents as well. Not for every species clearly, but apply or lose your points would help NR and residents alike. Last I checked outfitters liked having repeat clientele as well.

This shouldn’t be a resident vs nonresident shit show thread.

 

[Fowl Play]

We could also ban all hunting content from YT/FB/IG.

I feel like this would backfire.

 

[IDVortex]

Wait, point creep doesn’t negatively affect residents? Most states with point systems have points for residents as well. Not for every species clearly, but apply or lose your points would help NR and residents alike. Last I checked outfitters liked having repeat clientele as well.

This shouldn’t be a resident vs nonresident shit show thread.

But, when it comes down to it. The residents need to be the ones who decide we need change.

 

[Ucsdryder]

We could also ban all hunting content from YT/FB/IG.

That’s so stupid. How would MF feed his family?!!!!!

 

[IDVortex]

That’s so stupid. How would MF feed his family?!!!!!

Maybe we should take him on as a influencer, ignor his faults and think of his wife and kids. Maybe get him some NV to hunt at night too.

 

[3forks]

I think that if a resident or non-resident wants to enter the draw system, they should have to pay for the cost of the tag upfront.

Once the resident / nonresident tag was paid for, the hunter could accrue points until they drew the tag they wanted.

If the hunter decided they wanted opt out of the draw, and wanted their money back, they would receive a refund on the cost they paid for the license, but lose their preference points.

 

[IDVortex]

I think that if a resident or non-resident wants to enter the draw system, they should have to pay for the cost of the tag upfront.

Once the resident / nonresident tag was paid for, the hunter could accrue points until they drew the tag they wanted.

If the hunter decided they wanted opt out of the draw, and wanted their money back, they would receive a refund on the cost they paid for the license, but lose their preference points.

Doesn't WY do this? I know when I applied for a hunt in WY a couple years ago I had to buy the tag at the time. But now the tag is even harder to get because it still hasn't capped the creep.
I feel this only helps on the OIL tags that are already expensive for a tag itself.