Wyoming Passes 90/10: The Worst Article You’ll Read This Year - by Guy Eastman

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
Very well said Hilltop. Of course that was the expectation given. People wouldn't buy points if there wasn't an expectation of drawing a tag some day.
Sure they would, I buy points every year to either just increase my odds, or more than likely, just to assure my odds are not any worse.

I have purchased exactly zero points under the assumption of a guaranteed tag...because the reality is, points do not assure me a tag.

And I have a pile of them in Nevada, Montana, Arizona, Utah, Colorado for all kinds of species....over 20 for some species and States.

Likely going to die with a lot of points in a lot of states...the reason?

There was never a promise of a tag...and I won't be suing the States for that or whining about it like nrs of Wyoming are right now.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,796
2,162
Eastern Nebraska
Anyone that ever thought points would guarantee a tag was living in la-la land or must have thought they would live to be 120+ years of age...
Seriously Buzz....

Using your logic, a person starting preference points for moose in 2010 should have known they would have to live to be 120 before drawing? There were 1247 moose applicants total applying for 100 permits that year. A couple areas took max but there were many tags drawing below max including cow tags for 0 points. That would likely give a person the impression that they would be able to draw in 15-20 years or at minimum opt for a cow hunt at some point. People who started 5 years prior to that saw an even better ratio of applicants to permits.

In 2010, max points was 14. Area 11 bull tags only took 5 points to draw. Area 4, 22, and 28 bull tags only took 7 points to draw. Area 18 and 40 took 8 points. Area 25 took 9 points. There were 19 cow tags that took mainly 0 points to a few that took 1 point. That sure looked favorable to applicants starting to invest that some areas were only taking half of max points to draw... and the message from WG&F reaffirmed their decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mallardsx2

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
Seriously Buzz....

Using your logic, a person starting preference points for moose in 2010 should have known they would have to live to be 120 before drawing? There were 1247 moose applicants total applying for 100 permits that year. A couple areas took max but there were many tags drawing below max including cow tags for 0 points. That would likely give a person the impression that they would be able to draw in 15-20 years or at minimum opt for a cow hunt at some point. People who started 5 years prior to that saw an even better ratio of applicants to permits.

In 2010, max points was 14. Area 11 bull tags only took 5 points to draw. Area 4, 22, and 28 bull tags only took 7 points to draw. Area 18 and 40 took 8 points. Area 25 took 9 points. There were 19 cow tags that took mainly 0 points to a few that took 1 point. That sure looked favorable to applicants starting to invest that some areas were only taking half of max points to draw... and the message from WG&F reaffirmed their decisions.
That sounded great in 2010 until tag numbers were slashed and cow moose permits were all but gone in a majority of the state. There was also not only 1247 applicants for 100 moose in 2010...every applicant is considered...depends on which point pools the tags were drawn from as well as the random side. Plus, you have no idea who is going to decide to jump into the draw from which point pools.

If what you're trying to project were true, then all 1247 of those that applied in 2010 should all have drawn, or nearly so. Further, the top point pools should be cleared...neither is close to reality.

Doesn't matter anyway, the state sold you a point that you received and still have.

Nobody EVER said things wouldn't change...and common sense tells me as a NR hunter of many States my future odds of drawing are not going to improve in any of them I apply to. They have not improved in any state I apply in...no matter how many points I have.

Wildlife numbers are not improving and are likely not going to.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,796
2,162
Eastern Nebraska
I hate to say it but I would like to see where Wyoming DWR said that the preference point system would guarantee a applicant a license or a tag.

At the very most I would say that they said that it would better a applicant's odds of obtaining a license/tag in the draw.
Actually they did Jim. Do you really think I would be posting and arguing if what you stated was true? Wyoming Game and Fish knowingly marketed the preference point system as a way to guarantee an applicant would eventually draw.

The exact quote reads "A preference point system will ultimately guarantee an applicant a license." Most evidence is no longer available on the web but there are still a few places you can find it.
It is mentioned a few times in the 1997 Audit - namely recommending they not use that terminology any longer as the WG&F was already starting to recognize the problems with the system. It only took them another 25 years to make a change. https://www.wyoleg.gov/progeval/reports/1997/License/license.pdf

More recently, Chief Game Warden Brian Nesvik acknowledges the fact - “Preference points were originally intended to provide hunters with predictability and reasonable assurance that over time, their chances of drawing high demand areas would increase. Specifically for non-residents, they were intended to help hunters predict how often they would draw a tag for their favorite areas. It appears now that the number of preference point holders and the maximum number of preference points available has increased, and the level of predictability has decreased, at least for some hunt areas. This conflict with the original intent is definitely something we have been hearing about from sportsmen.”

He stated this in 2019 even though the department knew of the upcoming problems way back in 1997.
https://wyoga.org/preference-points-explained/
 

Winchester

Veteran member
Mar 27, 2014
2,464
1,821
Woodland Park, Colorado
I have purchased exactly zero points under the assumption of a guaranteed tag...because the reality is, points do not assure me a tag.
No one is saying tags were ever guaranteed… except you as you twist words to try and make your point.
But people were given an expectation of better odds of someday drawing a tag. Now those expectations have been taken away with the decrease in NR tags.
It’s a bait and switch for NRs who have been buying points for years. Your arguments don’t change that fact. Sure, WY has the legal right to do this … but it’s still a bait and switch.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,796
2,162
Eastern Nebraska
That sounded great in 2010 until tag numbers were slashed and cow moose permits were all but gone in a majority of the state. There was also not only 1247 applicants for 100 moose in 2010...every applicant is considered...depends on which point pools the tags were drawn from as well as the random side. Plus, you have no idea who is going to decide to jump into the draw from which point pools.

If what you're trying to project were true, then all 1247 of those that applied in 2010 should all have drawn, or nearly so. Further, the top point pools should be cleared...neither is close to reality.

Doesn't matter anyway, the state sold you a point that you received and still have.

Nobody EVER said things wouldn't change...and common sense tells me as a NR hunter of many States my future odds of drawing are not going to improve in any of them I apply to. They have not improved in any state I apply in...no matter how many points I have.

Wildlife numbers are not improving and are likely not going to.
None of what you typed has anything to do with my post. I think you are agreeing with me in a strange way? No applicant in 2010 thought it would take 120 years... if that were the case, they wouldn't have sold all those points.
 

JimP

Administrator
Mar 28, 2016
7,070
8,347
70
Gypsum, Co
Actually they did Jim. Do you really think I would be posting and arguing if what you stated was true? Wyoming Game and Fish knowingly marketed the preference point system as a way to guarantee an applicant would eventually draw.

The exact quote reads "A preference point system will ultimately guarantee an applicant a license." Most evidence is no longer available on the web but there are still a few places you can find it.
It is mentioned a few times in the 1997 Audit - namely recommending they not use that terminology any longer as the WG&F was already starting to recognize the problems with the system. It only took them another 25 years to make a change. https://www.wyoleg.gov/progeval/reports/1997/License/license.pdf

More recently, Chief Game Warden Brian Nesvik acknowledges the fact - “Preference points were originally intended to provide hunters with predictability and reasonable assurance that over time, their chances of drawing high demand areas would increase. Specifically for non-residents, they were intended to help hunters predict how often they would draw a tag for their favorite areas. It appears now that the number of preference point holders and the maximum number of preference points available has increased, and the level of predictability has decreased, at least for some hunt areas. This conflict with the original intent is definitely something we have been hearing about from sportsmen.”

He stated this in 2019 even though the department knew of the upcoming problems way back in 1997.
https://wyoga.org/preference-points-explained/
I think that the key word here is "eventually" That could be a very very long time away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuzzH

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
None of what you typed has anything to do with my post. I think you are agreeing with me in a strange way? No applicant in 2010 thought it would take 120 years... if that were the case, they wouldn't have sold all those points.
Then explain why so many nr hunters in wyoming bought their first point for sheep and moose in Wyoming in 2021....
 

JimP

Administrator
Mar 28, 2016
7,070
8,347
70
Gypsum, Co
Oh, there still is a possibility of a NR drawing one of those tags, it just will take another lifetime to draw it.

I'm in the same boat in a couple of states where I have too many points to drop out but not enough to draw. When there are only 1 or 2 NR tags offered for a hunt you have to wonder if it is really worth it.

My only hope on a couple of those draws is that they allow a motorized wheelchair for when I finally do draw. I did the math a few years ago and figured that I would be close to 92 when I drew the tag unless I got lucky and drew one of the random tags if it is offered which is one of my only chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuzzH

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
No one is saying tags were ever guaranteed… except you as you twist words to try and make your point.
But people were given an expectation of better odds of someday drawing a tag. Now those expectations have been taken away with the decrease in NR tags.
It’s a bait and switch for NRs who have been buying points for years. Your arguments don’t change that fact. Sure, WY has the legal right to do this … but it’s still a bait and switch.
So when moose or sheep or deer populations have been dropping...and fewer tags issued now than 20 years ago...is that still bait and switch?

I mean when I started applying for sheep 🐏 n Wyoming in 1999, they were issuing 100+ more tags than now. My odds did not improve with fewer tags

I didn't expect sheep or moose numbers to decrease over time...in particular with the amount of money we pour into managing them.

Should I sue the state over that?

This nonsense of nrs feeling they are owed anything other than a chance to draw is flat ridiculousness....apply or don't. I couldn't care less.

And I hope residents of the states I apply in as a nr realize how grateful I am to just apply, no matter how slight my odds are. They owe me not a damn thing, including not a single tag.

Like I said, in no other state I hunt do I see this kind of nr entitlement displayed toward resident hunters. It's curious...and it's because we've been too generous for too long.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,796
2,162
Eastern Nebraska
So when moose or sheep or deer populations have been dropping...and fewer tags issued now than 20 years ago...is that still bait and switch?

I mean when I started applying for sheep 🐏 n Wyoming in 1999, they were issuing 100+ more tags than now. My odds did not improve with fewer tags

I didn't expect sheep or moose numbers to decrease over time...in particular with the amount of money we pour into managing them.

Should I sue the state over that?

This nonsense of nrs feeling they are owed anything other than a chance to draw is flat ridiculousness....apply or don't. I couldn't care less.

And I hope residents of the states I apply in as a nr realize how grateful I am to just apply, no matter how slight my odds are. They owe me not a damn thing, including not a single tag.

Like I said, in no other state I hunt do I see this kind of nr entitlement displayed toward resident hunters. It's curious...and it's because we've been too generous for too long.
Every person on both sides of this issue understand there will be fluctuations in tags. Non-residents are owed what we were sold. Predictability and reasonable assurance that over time, our chances of drawing a tag will increase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich M

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
Every person on both sides of this issue understand there will be fluctuations in tags. Non-residents are owed what we were sold. Predictability and reasonable assurance that over time, our chances of drawing a tag will increase.
Here's what's predictable...your odds of drawing ANY tag in ANY state is never going to better than the current year you're applying.

No matter the species, state, or point totals.

Been a fact for every tag in every state I've applied in for the last 41 years.
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
Every person on both sides of this issue understand there will be fluctuations in tags. Non-residents are owed what we were sold. Predictability and reasonable assurance that over time, our chances of drawing a tag will increase.
Do they?

I think its misleading marketing...we're spending more, and more and more on management and getting no increase in populations and permits.

Sounds like bait and switch.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,796
2,162
Eastern Nebraska
Here's what's predictable...your odds of drawing ANY tag in ANY state is never going to better than the current year you're applying.

No matter the species, state, or point totals.

Been a fact for every tag in every state I've applied in for the last 41 years.
Smh... not even you can really believe the stuff you type lol. My odds of drawing an antelope tag last year was 100%. The previous year was less than 50%. The year before that is was less than 1% in the random. I have quite a few more examples that would prove your statement wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gonhunting247

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
952
Smh... not even you can really believe the stuff you type lol. My odds of drawing an antelope tag last year was 100%. The previous year was less than 50%. The year before that is was less than 1% in the random. I have quite a few more examples that would prove your statement wrong.
You got lucky, because you had NO way of knowing who was going to apply from what pools.

There was an equally good chance that nobody in your point pool would draw and you would have been in the 1%.

I have hundreds of examples of odds declining for decades...if your odds were improving, nobody would be implementing point systems and whining about allocations.
 

Winchester

Veteran member
Mar 27, 2014
2,464
1,821
Woodland Park, Colorado
So when moose or sheep or deer populations have been dropping...and fewer tags issued now than 20 years ago...is that still bait and switch?

I mean when I started applying for sheep 🐏 n Wyoming in 1999, they were issuing 100+ more tags than now. My odds did not improve with fewer tags

I didn't expect sheep or moose numbers to decrease over time...in particular with the amount of money we pour into managing them.

Should I sue the state over that?

This nonsense of nrs feeling they are owed anything other than a chance to draw is flat ridiculousness....apply or don't. I couldn't care less.

And I hope residents of the states I apply in as a nr realize how grateful I am to just apply, no matter how slight my odds are. They owe me not a damn thing, including not a single tag.

Like I said, in no other state I hunt do I see this kind of nr entitlement displayed toward resident hunters. It's curious...and it's because we've been too generous for too long.
Wow, you sure like to twist words and change the subject ... a normal tactic for someone who can't defend what's actually being discussed.
I didn't say anything about suing anyone.
And you actually summed up my point with "This nonsense of nrs feeling they are owed anything other than a chance to draw..."
That's it exactly, applicants were promised a chance to draw ... and after years of buying points its being taken away.
Hilltop summed it up ... misleading marketing.

And you didn't need to say "I couldn't care less." It's fairly obvious you only care about yourself and being able to add another tag to the 10 or so you already draw annually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steve O