$20 NR application. Mulitple species odds suck!

[txhunter58]

My license from last year is still valid, so I was able to apply today for deer and elk for $20. Truly a bargain in todays applications process.

This is definitely the year I DON't get picked!! I just have a feeling. (reverse psychology works right??)

As to the units I put in for?? "So you're saying there's a chance!"

But seriously, if any residents feel like going to bat for us at any meetings, please ask that we be removed from being able to apply for multiple LICENSES (deer and elk, etc). While I can apply for multiple licenses, I can only draw 1, so I get no more opportunity than if I only apply for 1, but my odds are MUCH worse. I don't see the fairness in that

Ideally, let us apply for as many bonus points as we want (so Utah gets our money for the app) but only let us apply for one tag. That way, Utah is happy and we are happy with MUCH better odds. I can not see where this would impact residents in any way, but would help us out tremendously.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[ElmerFudd]

Yep. But the department likes the extra application dollars!

 

[JRABQ]

"Yep. But the department likes the extra application dollars!"

The point of TX's proposal is that UT still gets the money for the points. I like it.

 

[WhiskeyDog]

Applying for bonus points only instead of applying for the hunt won't improve your odds. If you can build points so can everyone else. It's still going to take years to reach the top of the points pool. It's a matter of tag numbers in comparison to the number of people that want the tag. If you're in for the draw you at least have the chance of lottery luck to draw at random. If you're only applying for points you're sure to not get a tag.

 

[txhunter58]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-09-15 AT 11:46AM (MST)[p]



Not so Whiskey. It will tremendously improve our odds immediately and every year going forward. Think about it. Lets say we have 100 applicants that all put in for elk and deer. That means that my odds decreased by 1/2 when they opened it up to multiple TAGS. However, if they make the change I am promoting, now there are 1/2 that apply for deer and 1/2 that apply for elk, my odds double immediately. At worse , if they changed the system, my chances increase from 1 in 100 to 1 in 50. Lets say the odds for your current tag choice are 2%, they should jump to 4%, 5 % they should jump to 10% etc.

That of course assumes that 1/2 apply for each species, but even if they don't, then the odds for the other species will MORE than double! I suspect it will be pretty even in the end.

And very few people draw each year, so the people who switch from one species to the other because they drew a tag are miniscule in number compared to the total. And if any other species are lumped in there (antelope) your odds go up even more. So just because some nonresidents draw won't change the overall odds hardly at all. After all, we only get 1 licese for every 10 residents get.

And as stated, you can only draw 1 TAG. If you draw a deer tag (which comes first in the draw) you are removed from the elk drawing. Since I want to draw my elk tag more than anything, I put in for the Henry's hunt every year because that is the only deer tag I would give up my shot at an elk tag for. So I am ruining other guys chances that really want to draw the Henrys!

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[txhunter58]

>Yep. But the department likes the
>extra application dollars!

My point exactly. Continue to let us apply for bonus points in other species, so Utah gets the same amount of money.

But we can only apply for 1 TAG/LICENSE.

I can see no down side for anyone.


txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[WhiskeyDog]

Your theory only works if 1) there were no bonus points or 2) you aren't able to buy bonus points for the species in which you aren't applying for, just like residents. There may be a few unique situations where a guy would be ahead of the game, but in the long run it wouldn't help. If a guy buys elk points while putting in for deer, he will enter the elk pool with a point for every year he applied for deer. If it takes him 10 years to draw a deer tag he will enter the elk pool with ten points. It will still take on average the same amount of years to hit max points. Now if you're a guy that only has an interest in one species ever from utah your idea could work, but then you wouldn't need to buy bonus points for other species. As for the random draw besides the bonus tags the simple way to think of it is. Your idea would give a 1 in 10 chance for deer, whereas the way it is now you have a 1 in 20 chance for deer and 1 in 20 chance for elk= 2 in 20 chance for a tag. Still the same percentage chance of a tag. Obviously numbers are bigger and there are other species but it breaks down the same.

 

[txhunter58]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-10-15 AT 07:42PM (MST)[p]

Nope, your math is flawed. Two 1 in 20 chances does not equal a 2 in 20 chance. Doesn't work that way. Using that logic if you flip a coin twice, you have 100% chance of getting heads instead of 75%.

I will take a 10% chance of drawing a single tag any day instead of two 5% chances. And personally I don't really care if I ever draw a deer tag, so increasing my elk tag possibilities by double is great in my book. I am sure there are lots of guys who would much rather draw a deer tag as well.

Lets look at it another way, your odds will increase in two ways: by doubling your chance of drawing the single tag and by reducing the years to reach max points, since many of those will choose other species. That reduces the number in front of you and you can get to a max tag sooner which is 100%

I can not see where anyone is worse off. You can only draw one tag! There is no way you can draw 2. So how does it make any sense to put in for more than one when you can only draw one?


txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[WhiskeyDog]

I guess you're not following what I'm getting at. If your sole purpose is one species only, your idea works. If you want several species then it doesn't. Personally I think if your big objective in utah is mule deer you're probably choosing the wrong state. Even our limited entry tags are going in the tank. If you doubled your chance at deer then you would cut your chance at elk in half because the other half of the applicants that prefer elk would be ahead of you.

 

[txhunter58]

Either way, you can only draw 1 tag, and your odds of drawing "A" tag are slightly better under my system.

"If you want several species" you can still build bonus points

I can see no reason anyone is hurt. Your chances are better for drawing the tag you most want, and you get points for the future in other species.

If you could acutally draw 2 tags, then I could see your point

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[WhiskeyDog]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-11-15 AT 11:44AM (MST)[p]Your thought process is based on drawing in the random draw. My thought process is based on drawing a bonus tag. My point being you wouldn't reach max points, thus being eligible for a bonus tag, any earlier than the current system. I guess I assumed this was what you were referring to because of your mention of bonus points. The odds involved with drawing in the random draw are so low that I would never count on it, thus the whole reason for a points system. Say they were giving away 2 new trucks. A ford(deer) and a Ram(elk). They could sell 1 million tickets for the ford and 1 million tickets for the ram, you could decide to buy 1 ticket for one truck but not the other. Or they could sell 2 million tickets for a new truck which you could buy 2 tickets for. You would choose the first option because you would rather one brand than the other. I would choose the second option because I just want a new truck(tag) whether it be the ford or the ram. The odds of winning a truck are still the same. Your option you have double the chance of a specific tag with zero chance of the other. My option I have half the chance you do, but I have that chance twice. You say you can only draw one tag, but that's per year. Not per life. Your system rewards guys that only want a specific species from utah. The current system makes it fair for those that want several species from utah. Which as a state is what they want. They want guys to have a goal of drawing several tags which will keep then applying longer. If a guy who truly only wants a utah deer finally draws that tag he may stop caring about elk and quit applying.

 

[txhunter58]

Not true

If you enter 2 drawings, you have LESS odds of drawing a truck than I would with 2 tickets in one drawing. Not by much, but your odds will always be less.





txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[txhunter58]

" The current system makes it fair for those that want several species from utah. Which as a state is what they want. They want guys to have a goal of drawing several tags which will keep then applying longer. If a guy who truly only wants a utah deer finally draws that tag he may stop caring about elk and quit applying."

I realize we will probably never agree but I still have a different slant. I keep the discussion going in hopes that someone that can actually have an impact will agree with me.

Currently guys who are just interested in 1 species are only putting in for 1. If they are putting in for mulitple, it is not likely they will abandon the ship once they get drawn. they will be too invested. I won't even though deer is secondary, and while elk is my addiction, I also love the big muley I have hanging on my wall. So in reality, I am invested in more than one species because I have never missed a year with either deer or elk since they changed.

And they may actually have an increase in applications due to better odds. I came very close to stopping my applications when they made the change and the odds went south.

Facts under my system:

You can only apply for 1 tag but multiple species bonus points.
Better odds of drawing "a" tag.
Less people between you and max points.
You can still get bonus points every year for each species.
You can switch from one species to the other if odds change.
When you do draw your first choice, you switch to the other species(and your odds are better!)

So, IMO, you are no worse off than you are now. And again IMO, improved in several ways.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[dillon]

I spent $125 this year because I had to buy a license this year.

As a Utah native who plans to move back to Utah at some point I like being able to apply for all the species. I apply for limited entry deer and elk, mountain goats, bison and moose ever year. I am also building preference points for general deer.

I also live in Nevada so I can apply for everything here now as well. It cost a few bucks, but I get a lot of applications out on this program.

So far I have not drawn a tag in Utah or Nevada since I moved to Nevada in 2012.

I rest my case that draw odds are not in my favor...yet.

Dillon
www.dillonhoyt.com

 

[Zeke]

txhunter58,

I've been following your threads and trying to follow your thunking and I'm having a difficult time. (I think I understand what you're saying but your odds concept seem flawed)

If you're trying to draw "a" (any tag) tag then the current system, for NR, would not reduce or increase your chances. You have the same chance as everyone else to draw "any" tag.

I suppose if you're trying to draw a species-specific tag, you're hoping the interest/applications would be less if an applicant had to choose just one? Seems to me that if the rule were the same, and everyone could only apply for 1 tag, that it would NOT increase your draw odds. I cannot mathematically see where you're correct.

Now, IF you could only apply, and build points, for 1 species, then some species would most certainly have either better or worse odds depending on popularity.

Think of it this way please; whether everyone can apply for every tag.... or everyone can apply for just one tag, it should not have a bearing on the draw odds..... if you're not concerning yourself with a species-specific tag and just want "a" tag.

Yes, I fully understand that a NR applicant can only DRAW one tag per year. Odds are so damn low of drawing 2 tags per year that this shouldn't even enter into the equation.

Either I'm correct or you've failed to communicate the information in a manner by which this country boy can understand.

Zeke

 

[txhunter58]

Zeke. Lets say that we have a total of 100 applicants for all species.

Currently those 100 people all apply for deer, elk, and antelope.

So your chance would be 1 in 100 for three different drawings.

Your odds of drawing something in that scenerio is NOT 3 in 100 (3%). The formula is actually:

1 - (99/100 x 99/100 x 99/100) = 0.0297 (2.97%) of drawing "a" tag.

I know that looks weird, but I promise you it is accurate.

Your odds of drawing if the applicants were split equally between species:

1/33.3 = 0.030 = 3%

So in my new system, I go from a 1% chance (current system) to a 3% chance of drawing "the" tag of my choice. In my case, an elk tag.

So overall, my odds are better: 3 % > 2.97 %
and I jumped from a 1% chance to draw an elk tag to a 3%

Now with my actual current elk points (10) there are units where I now have a 5-10% odds of an elk tag.

Under my system, those odds would be 15-30% of drawing an elk tag. Works the same way for people who covet deer more. There odds would triple for drawing a deer tag.

And I am not that far out of max points on some hunts. If some of those people switch to deer, then I am that much closer to getting a max point (100%) tag



txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[WhiskeyDog]

That is the species specific only advantage we were talking about. If there are 100 people applying for 3 species each. That is 300 total applications. Each person would have 3 of those applications. Which means each individual has 3/300=1/100. If they are limited to one species equally divided by three that is 1/33 for their selected species but they have 0/33 and 0/34 for the other two. If you're only getting a point for the other two you have zero chance of drawing that species that year. So each year you have 1/100 chance of drawing one of the three species you want. Might be 1/33 for your one species, which might be good if you only ever want that one species. But it's still 1/100 for a tag. Or 3/300 in the current system. Either way you have the same chance of having a tag to fill that year. Do you really only wanna hunt one species in Utah or do you wanna hunt them all in whatever order they fall?

 

[txhunter58]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-15 AT 11:45AM (MST)[p]

No, that is not how probability works. The chances of drawing a tag under the present system will ALWAYS be lower than drawing a tag under my proposal.

Lets look at the ultimate example.

3 total applications for 3 tags

Current system Probability that you will draw a tag with 3 seperate drawings, each have a 1 in 3 chance of drawing

1 - ( 2/3 x 2/3 x 2/3) = 1 - 0.296 = 0.704 = 70.4%

My proposal:

all three applicants put in for seperate drawings so:

each applicant is the only one in the drawing. Their chance = 100%

As the number of applicants increase, the current system odds get closer and apporoach the odds of mine, but are ALWAYS lower.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[txhunter58]

LAST EDITED ON Feb-13-15 AT 11:50AM (MST)[p]



Whisky said: "Do you really only wanna hunt one species in Utah or do you wanna hunt them all in whatever order they fall?"

And let me rephrase what I said earlier. I REALLY REALLY want to draw an elk tag, and I would also like to draw a deer tag someday.

Ok, even if I want to hunt all species, I keep building points in those species until I draw that first tag(or decide to switch), so my odds of drawing all species eventually will be better than under the current system.

And under my system, if I want to hunt one species, I can verify that this year, the dates work for me. If you apply for 3 species, the dates may be different between species

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[txhunter58]

One final argument:

If being able to apply for multiple species is so great, and it doesn't hurt your odds that much, why can't residents apply for all species? I am sure there are some that would be in favor, but if most were, it would be done.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[ColdBore]

>And let me rephrase what I said earlier. I REALLY REALLY want to draw an elk tag, and I would also like to draw a deer tag someday.<

I can understand where you're trying to go with the odds thing. I think the reality of it is somewhere in-between the two sides of the arguments in this thread.

What would work better in your situation, and I've actually thought of this before, is that rather than only being able to draw one, and then be removed from the other draw, but in an order that you can't control, find a way to where you can PREFERENCE the species that you want drawn FIRST.

That way you could say that you wanted in the elk draw first, and only if you didn't draw, then be in the deer draw. Or reverse the order as that individual chooses. Maybe keep an option of "I don't care which is first, just give me a tag for *something*" for those who don't have a preference.

Not sure of the logistics, or how to make it work, but I'm sure somebody smarter than me could figure it out.

It might involve an extra round of "preferred bids" being implemented before merging all leftover applicants (which decreases some odds while allowing others to increase in their preferred draw). As with most other things, some would find a benefit, others would find it as a detriment. Regardless, we are all resistant to change, so I have little hope of ever seeing it happen.

 

[Packout]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 08:30AM (MST)[p]Tex has this one right. I would fight against allowing Utah residents to apply for all species. Here are some numbers to consider.

2014 numbers- Residents can only apply for one species.

LE Deer- 37,304 apps 1164 permits 1 tag for every 32 apps
LE Elk- 52,108 apps 2607 Permits 1 tag for every 20 apps
LE Antelope- 6795 apps 736 Permits 1 tag for every 9 apps
Overall-- 96,207 apps for 4,507 Permits 1 tag per 21 apps

If Residents can apply for each species-- Assume roughly 50% of applicants from each pool apply for the other species- less for antelope. Odds become worse if more than 50% apply for multiple species.
LE Deer- 65,000 apps 1164 permits 1 tag for every 56 apps
LE Elk- 72,000 apps 2607 Permits 1 tag for every 28 apps
LE Antelope- 30,000 apps 736 Permits 1 tag for every 41 apps
Overall-- 167,000 apps 4,507 Permits 1 tag per 37 apps

I can't see how anyone can feel they have better odds by being able to apply for all species. Applying for all species is a shell game and hurts everyone involved. Nonresidents are taking it on this one.

Unfortunately, there are some residents who do not understand how it hurts all applicants. They want "fairness" to be able to apply for all species.

 

[Zeke]

This discussion is taking place in a couple places here on MM.
Your odds do diminish if you can apply for all species instead of being species-specific.
I like the single (or two apps in the case of Utah residents) choice applications rather than a free for all.
I see where tx is coming from.
Zeke

 

[txhunter58]

Thanks Packout! I would appreciate it if you mention that at any Utah meetings you attend! As I stated, continue to let people put in for POINTS only for all species (so Utah gets their money) but only apply for 1 TAG.

It might even increase applicants since odds of drawing a single species would go up.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

 

[bowedark]

The only way to increase odds. If you apply for a license or tag you must advance the money upfront. You would see a great correction in the point system. Also would change the point creep in a dramatic way.