That's a great question.
Actually, I did an exhaustive study last year for each species to come up with standard scales for each grade category for that species that would hold across all states. So when we give the grades for opportunity, access or pressure, trophy quality and everything else that goes into the overall grade you see at the far right of a table, not only is each category grade standardized across all states but the overall grade is also standardized that way.
Now, a blue or green chip rating is not strictly the same as the overall rating. The blue chip or green chip rating is more focused on the odds of taking a trophy quality animal and having a great hunt for the coming year. The overall grade looks mainly at history and weights the underlying variables a little differently.
A hunt with an A overall grade will usually have a blue chip rating and vice versa but not always. The overall grade is based much more on the historical numbers while there is more of a subjective forecasting element in the chip ratings. They each have their place.
The chip ratings did not used to be standardized across all states but we have made an effort this year to make it that way. I am a fan of standardization and consistency. I realize that people often apply for more than one state and so I think it is important that a blue chip in Nevada be a blue chip in Montana.
So, that's the long version to say yes - a blue chip in one state will usually be a blue chip in another state, starting with the 2014-2015 MRS season. You may have noticed that some states have less or more blue chip units this year than they used to because of that.
For example, although Colorado has the largest elk population in the West, because so much of the state is managed for opportunity most units don't have many top-end bulls, have far lower success rates and much more pressure than Utah or Nevada. So, if you compare the three states, you'll find a much higher percentage of elk blue chip units in Nevada and Utah than in Colorado. I think that is as it should be in terms of reporting. Otherwise, they would have the same percentage of blue chip units and I don't think that would be a fair description.
I hope that's more clear than mud.
