Hunting Draw Priority Points Cap

[walking buffalo]

[QUOTE=Duk Dog;517548]Maybe all the draws don't need to be impacted. SRD needs to be asked the question - is the P6 cap being proposed for all species draws currently taking a P6 or higher, or is it only being considered for the now impossible to draw tags?[QUOTE]


This question needs to be answered by ASRD and soon.

As I suggested in post #74

Originally Posted by duffy4

"I agree 100% With Pack hunter.If It aint Broke Dont Fix it!!!!"

I guess that is what we are discussing here, "Is it broke?" and "How is the best way to fix it?"

I like the idea of 80 % of the tags in any draw on the priority system and 20% on a no priority random lottery. You enter one way or you enter the other way.

Those who want to be guaranteed to get a tag after so many years and willing to accept that they are guaranteed they will not get a tag until they reach a certain priority, will go that route.(the way the wonderful priority system works)

The "gamblers" will take a chance they might get lucky and get a tag or not any given year. (the way it used to be).

I think the 80/20 is being misunderstood by many. The way it would work is that everyone would apply to the same draw code as always. Then, 80% of the tags would be given to those with the highest priority as is done now. Then, all people that did not draw a tag, regardless of priority, would be eligible for the remaining 20% through a random lottery. The 999 option would still exist for those that only wanted a priority point but otherwise, people would apply as normal. You would not select for the 80 or 20 side of the draw. You would enter once and if not drawn on the 80% side, you would automatically be entered in the 20% side...unless you 999'd. This to me is the simplest to administer and fairest to all. The guys with the highest priority would still have access to 100% of the tags and those with lesser priority only 20%.

[sheepguide]

why take tags away from the guys that have dedicated time and money into applying for many years? Sure them guys will have a chance for the lottery but why should a guy putting in his first year get a tag before someone else?
The only draws I know of right now that are impossible for the new comer to draw is the sheep draws. Change these areas to a once in a lifetime lotto and leave the rest alone. Everyone has a chance to get draw a few times in a lifetime or more so leave well enough alone. We wait minimum of 9 years to draw moose where I hunt and we do this because a book moose is a possability. To have some first year applicants get drawn would be about as stupid an idea as ive heard in a while. If they wanna hunt there put in the time.
Dont penalize everyone because of a couple stupid sheep draws that didnt get planned properly when they were brought in.

Guys on the sheep thread harped the issue about taking oppertunity from the dedicated guys. Well that is exactly what an 80/20 split will do. It will lower the number of high priority dedicated guys that get drawn every year.

I agree SG...other than putting the sheep draws on random (talk about unfair to guys with top priority) but the fact is, F&W is going to change the draw system and they are suggesting a cap of 6 points. The 80/20 split addresses all their concerns with the current draw system and takes the least away from the guys with high priority. According to F&W, leaving well enough alone is not an option.

So even if we leave all alone but the sheep draws...how do we fix WMU408 and 437?

[BigJon]

I think the guys that are in support of the 80/20 split have the mind set that this is the best option compared to what could happen. And what could happen is an all across the board P6 cap...which would be a disaster. If this is what it comes down to I would be all for the 80/20 split.

Ideally only the impossible sheep draws would be refined. For this I have no better idea than an 80/20 or split. There will be people with hurt feelings but in the end I think it's best. Young, beginner hunters can have the dream of pursuing a ram in one of the coveted zones then and the lifers in the draw system still get the best crack at tags.

My head hurts thinking about this. I will definately be sending a letter to Edmonton. It is going to take me a few days thinking everything over and compiling something constructive but a letter will be on it's way.

That is what we all need to do. Compile a well written letter and bring our concerns forward. If you can get away from the office or jobsite for a half hour pop into a provincial building and ask to speak to an area bio/officer/manager or phone them. Express your concern.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I agree SG...other than putting the sheep draws on random (talk about unfair to guys with top priority) but the fact is, F&W is going to change the draw system and they are suggesting a cap of 6 points. The 80/20 split addresses all their concerns with the current draw system and takes the least away from the guys with high priority. According to F&W, leaving well enough alone is not an option.

So even if we leave all alone but the sheep draws...how do we fix WMU408 and 437?

They are flawed from the start.

If you put in the 80/20 split its gunna drasticly lower your chance of getting drawn with a high pririty.

Right now you need a priority 13 to get draw in 437. 98 priority 13 guys put in and 12 were drawn.
Now put in the 80/20 split and you loose some high priority tags dropping the percent that get draw.
Now what if the 1468 people put in that 999'ed it because they think they now have a better chance to be drawn early. Now you added 38 more priority 13 people to the draw lower your chance even more.
Your not just taking a few tags away you could be adding alot more applicants every year. Guys that would never put in these zone because they know they cant get draw will all of a sudden put in because now they have a chance of a tag. I cant see how this is gunna help any thing.

Go with a lottery and use your priority points to determine how many times your name goes in. Its pretty much a lottery as it is.

Your gunna screw alot of high priority guys any way you change it.

Bigjon I take it as they are looking at the statistacly impossible draws not an across the board cap, unless I read the first posts wrong.

Originally Posted by sheepguide

They are flawed from the start.

If you put in the 80/20 split its gunna drasticly lower your chance of getting drawn with a high pririty.

Right now you need a priority 13 to get draw in 437. 98 priority 13 guys put in and 12 were drawn.
Now put in the 80/20 split and you loose some high priority tags dropping the percent that get draw.
Now what if the 1468 people put in that 999'ed it because they think they now have a better chance to be drawn early. Now you added 38 more priority 13 people to the draw lower your chance even more.
Your not just taking a few tags away you could be adding alot more applicants every year. Guys that would never put in these zone because they know they cant get draw will all of a sudden put in because now they have a chance of a tag. I cant see how this is gunna help any thing.

Go with a lottery and use your priority points to determine how many times your name goes in.

Your gunna screw alot of high priority guys any way you change it.

The absolute worst the highest priority guys can lose is 20% of the tags. So basically in WMU408, one tag a year would be put on random lottery to which those with the highest priority that did not draw from the 80% would still be included in the draw for that one tag. Darcy, I fail to even follow the rest of your math. The number of guys with the highest priority is not going to change under the 80/20....

Bigjon I take it as they are looking at the statistacly impossible draws not an across the board cap, unless I read the first posts wrong.

You read it and several subsequent posts wrong...they are proposing this for all draws.

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

The absolute worst the highest priority guys can lose is 20% of the tags. So basically in WMU408, one tag a year would be put on random lottery to which those with the highest priority that did not draw from the 80% would still be included in the draw for that one tag. Darcy, I fail to even follow the rest of your math. The number of guys with the highest priority is not going to change under the 80/20....



You read it and several subsequent posts wrong...they are proposing this for all draws.

This is BS. I am totally against it and will be sending my letter. I think this should only be for sheep tags. I also think if they go with this 80-20% you should have to hit a min priority to get in on the lottery tag like SG was saying that would limit the amount of people applying just for the sack of applying.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by Duk Dog

Below was one of the resolutions that did pass, and would be one possibility to offer an alternative to a priority points cap.

WILDLIFE RESOLUTION NUMBER W-11-2010
Submitted by: Zone 2
Drafted by: Sarcee Fish & Game Association
Random Lottery Tag Process

BE IT RESOLVED THAT a random lottery tag (or tags) be added for any draw license that is currently statistically impossible to draw (other than for those at or near the top of the priority pool). This would be built into the current draw process, but would now also include a random draw component.

BRIEF: This would make it possible for hunters new to the draw application process or those already statistically eliminated from drawing a tag, to potentially be able to draw an otherwise impossible to draw license. For those already at the top of the draw process they would now also have an additional chance to draw the tag via a random draw process, in addition to their current opportunity through the current priority point draw system.

Just went by this TJ. Doesnt say anything about "all". Maybe I missed it on another post.

It has the possibility to get more of the high priority guys that currently 999 there draws to put in and this would increase the total number of highest priority guys every year. Not saying it will but it could this would lower the chance of getting draw as 1/3 of the top priority guys are 999ing their draws in 437.

And like you said in 408 it would be 1 tag and in 437 it would be maybe 2.
So with over 3500 guys putting in these draws now how is this gunna improve anything.

Either leave the guys that are deserving the tags with the tags or make everyone equal if they feel the need is there.

Originally Posted by sheepguide

Just went by this TJ. Doesnt say anything about "all". Maybe I missed it on another post.

.

You did!

It has the possibility to get more of the high priority guys that currently 999 there draws to put in and this would increase the total number of highest priority guys every year. Not saying it will but it could this would lower the chance of getting draw as 1/3 of the top priority guys are 999ing their draws in 437.

Guys 999 for a multitude of reasons and that wouldn't change with the 80/20. They'd still build their points on years when they didn't want to draw and they'd still apply on years when they thought they could hunt if they were drawn. Some guys are also forced to 999 if they were successful the previous year.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

You did!

Could you point out which one so I can get the right facts then please.

Guys 999 for a multitude of reasons and that wouldn't change with the 80/20. They'd still build their points on years when they didn't want to draw and they'd still apply on years when they thought they could hunt if they were drawn. Some guys are also forced to 999 if they were successful the previous year.

I understand how the 999 works TJ 38 priority 13 guys 999'ed their 437 draw. If they decided because of the 80/20 split to put in there is a chance that the number of guys that put in could increase. You cant say it couldnt happen because you dont know. How do you know things wont change? Sure some will still build points but doesnt mean all will.
There is alot more that could happen than just taking a few tags and oputting them into a lottery!

[sheepguide]

Since TJ hasnt could some one point out where im reading this wrong.

Does DUK's original posts not state this will affect the statistacly impossible draws?

SG...your desire to argue and sidetrack important threads never ceases to amaze me. DUK's #2 post was about a resolution approved at the AFGA conference addressing those draws that were statistically impossible for many. His #1 post referenced moose and elk as well. Subsequesnt posts went on to talk about how SRD was proposing a cap on ALL draws at 6 points. The Resolution in DUK's original post was drafted prior to SRD making their info public about a 6-point cap on all draws. That is discussed later in the thread if you'd care to read it. This is very important to all Alberta hunters...not just sheep hunters so please take the time to read all the postss Darcy rather than looking for an opportunity to argue with me....it's getting old.

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by sheepguide

Since TJ hasnt could some one point out where im reading this wrong.

Does DUK's original posts not state this will affect the statistacly impossible draws?

This would apply to ANY SPECIES that has a draw meeting this criteria - ie some sheep hunts, as well as possibly some elk and moose draws. I'd have to review all of the draw statistics but I'm sure there may well be some other hunts as well. It was in post#1

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

SG...your desire to argue and sidetrack important threads never ceases to amaze me. DUK's original post was about a resolution approved at the AFGA conference addressing those draws that were statistically impossible for many. Subsequesnt posts went on to talk about how SRD was proposing a cap on ALL draws at 6 points. The Resolution in DUK's original post was drafted prior to SRD making their info public about a 6-point cap on all draws. That is discussed later in the thread if you'd care to read it. This is very important to all Alberta hunters...not just sheep hunters so please take the time to read all the postss Darcy rather than looking for an opportunity to argue with me....it's getting old.

He was not looking to fight TJ I think this thread was not clear.I had to read through it as well. As for argueing you are the king onthat with darcy and rich is right in behing you. Lets get back on track. Did anyone read my first comment.?

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

SG...your desire to argue and sidetrack important threads never ceases to amaze me. DUK's original post was about a resolution approved at the AFGA conference addressing those draws that were statistically impossible for many. Subsequesnt posts went on to talk about how SRD was proposing a cap on ALL draws at 6 points. The Resolution in DUK's original post was drafted prior to SRD making their info public about a 6-point cap on all draws. That is discussed later in the thread if you'd care to read it. This is very important to all Alberta hunters...not just sheep hunters so please take the time to read all the postss Darcy rather than looking for an opportunity to argue with me....it's getting old.

I asked for clarification TJ.
I also stated things that could possibly happen with the different options on the toughest to draw tags(sheep). YOU then argued them ideas. You argue as much as the next guy so dont play that. You have no better idea what these changes could affect than anyone else. I put out what I thought it would do and again you say im wrong.
I think your the one that has the real issue here TJ

I admitted that I may have read it wrong so whats your point.

My point was you read the post wrong ...now can we get back to the topic at hand?

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by JustinC

This would apply to ANY SPECIES that has a draw meeting this criteria - ie some sheep hunts, as well as possibly some elk and moose draws. I'd have to review all of the draw statistics but I'm sure there may well be some other hunts as well. It was in post#1

Thats how I read it too. Any draw statistacly immpossible to draw. I think there are only a couple sheep draws and possibly a couple elk draws. To me this isnt a total cap on all draws. How many years would they have to be to be classed as such?

Seems to me statistacly impossible is in a lifetime.

[Matt L.]

Come on guys, this thread has been good so far, lets not start arguing about nothing again.

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

Come on guys, this thread has been good so far, lets not start arguing about nothing again.

I am not going to.Sorry guys. This is the most important thread going right know.I want everybody to have a chance to voice there comments.Even all the people that argue.

Regardless of how the above posts were interpreted, the fact is that F&W is proposing a 6-point cap on all draws. This is being done to address what they consider some of the statistically impossible draws but it is not limited to them and it would apply to all draws for ease of administration I suspect.

Now can we discuss that?

[Matt L.]

Yes. I'm against a 6 pt. cap. But, I'm not sure what the right answer is. I'm coming from the perspective of one who has absolutely no chance of getting one of these tags. I don't want to pisz off any of the guys who have high priority, but I'd like to be able to have a chance to get in on these draws.

[JustinC]

I also think if they go with this 80-20% you should have to hit a min priority to get in on the lottery tag like SG was saying that would limit the amount of people applying just for the sack of applying. What is your thought on this sheep hunter,sheepguide?

Originally Posted by JustinC

I also think if they go with this 80-20% you should have to hit a min priority to get in on the lottery tag like SG was saying that would limit the amount of people applying just for the sack of applying. What is your thought on this sheep hunter,sheepguide?

I say let anyone have a shot at the 20%. It's not going to change the 80% of the draw if more people apply and it gives brand new hunters a chance at a dream tag.

[sheepguide]

If it is in fact a cap on all draws its a joke. How many draws out there need a priority 10 or greater?
Capping isnt gunna help the newer applicants just put a whole bunch of guys at priority 6 and making draws more like a lottery.

If there goal is to give the new guy a chance than the only way is lottery tags. It all depends on the percentage given out on how bad it will effect the guys with top priority.

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I say let anyone have a shot at the 20%. It's not going to change the 80% of the draw if more people apply and it gives brand new hunters a chance at a dream tag.

I understand but dont you think that there will be a giant increase in applicant so really the chances for that 1 or 2 tags be pretty much the same as it is anyway?

[Matt L.]

Exactly, I know that the old guys() who have been applying for years feel somewhat entitled to them, but we do have to think of the up-and-coming hunters out there. If we severely limit there chances, why should they hunt? Correct me if I'm wrong, but would not a 6 pt. cap across the board make most of the draws damn near impossible?

Originally Posted by JustinC

I understand but dont you think that there will be a giant increase in applicant so really the chances for that 1 or 2 tags be pretty much the same as it is anyway?

I don't see it changing much but who knows. I guess my point is, in draws like 408 and 437, other than guys in the top pool, the vast majority below them never have a chance of drawing anyhow, whether they are second in the priority line or 13th..so why not give them all equal opportunity? It will be long odds either way for the 20% but it gives opportunity to all. Plus, it's easier to administer.

[JustinC]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I don't see it changing much but who knows. I guess my point is, in draws like 408 and 437, other than guys in the top pool, the vast majority below them never have a chance of drawing anyhow, whether they are second in the priority line or 13th..so why not give them all equal opportunity? It will be long odds either way for the 20% but it gives opportunity to all. Plus, it's easier to administer.

Yes I will agree with you on the sheep draws.I am at the top on one of them and I see what you are saying with th 1500 others applying never drawing.I sure dont like the cap at six with any draw as MATT has just stated a great point that it would make it the same as it is with almost no chance of drawing a tag after you get to priority #6

[Matt L.]

And not just with the sheep draws but any draw that currently goes above 6, thereby worsening the problem if I'm thinking correctly.