LEH draw

[Frosty]

I talk to people hunting in Alberta and it seems like they have a draw system that makes people happy not pissed off like in B.C. You hear how people are guaranteed a draw every so many years(it may vary im not sure). Then in B.C. you hear of people that have been putting in for Island elk for 25 years and haven't been drawn, or the group of 6 guys that put in at 5:1 odds and get nothing. I guess you could sum it up as luck of the draw or unluck of the draw, but it just seems like there could be some sort of better system. I don't know maybe the government makes more money off this system?. Or maybe that 10 year old that got their first elk draw for dad really deserves it.......

[Bullmoose]

I agree, I guess it's highly improbable but possible for someone to never get lucky at 5 to 1 odds but I have a real problem on the other side of the coin when you know people who consistantly get drawn at these or greater odds. I know some draws are set aside for guiding outfits, I wonder how many permits are actually available for John Q Public

[kishman]

"Then in B.C. you hear of people that have been putting in for Island elk for 25 years and haven't been drawn, "



Yeesh I don't feel so bad for not getting my first Elk draw this year.

[youngfellla]

I agree, I guess it's highly improbable but possible for someone to never get lucky at 5 to 1 odds but I have a real problem on the other side of the coin when you know people who consistantly get drawn at these or greater odds. I know some draws are set aside for guiding outfits, I wonder how many permits are actually available for John Q Public


LEH goes only to resident hunters. The GO's don't take any pieces of that pie. They are issued a separate quota based on the pop. #'s in their territory. Every LEH permit goes to a resident hunter.

Take the Mountain Sheep in Spatsizi for example. The outfitter there gets around 10 permits. And there were over 50 LEH permits given to resident hunters this year.

[reach]

The draw is random. Unless it's rigged in some way, with such a large sample you will always see streaks of good luck and bad luck. I think the streaks show that it's not rigged.

6 guys applying for a 5:1 hunt have only a 74% chance of being drawn - not 120%. In about 1 of 4 cases none of the 6 will be drawn.

What alternative would you propose? Would you prefer more drastically reduced odds for successful applicants? For example, they could be completely disqualified for some number of years after any successful draw. But that would really cut down on the revenue, and IMHO would suck to have NO chance, instead of a smaller chance, at getting your draw for some number of years.

Or maybe a round robin system where you would apply for a species in one area and couldn't apply for anything else until your turn came up? That would end up with either years-long waiting lists, while you are locked into your choice, or a mad gold rush to get your application in early at some annual deadline (pretty much the same as the current lottery scenario, except without the existing reduced odds system).

Or maybe limited entry should become more limited, like allowing a maximum of 2 cards in total? Again, that would drastically cut down on the revenue, but should improve the odds for individual draws across the board.

Brainstorming here... how about an auction system? Put the tags up for auction... you could get a tag every single year if you wanted it badly enough. ;-) (just kidding about this one, obviously... but it sure would generate some revenue.)

But with any system at all, at the end of the day, you have the same number of authorizations being awarded to the same number of hunters. Suppose you have 10,000 hunters and 1,000 elk tags... there is no way to distribute those fairly in a way that will give you more than one elk in 10 years in the long run. Would you prefer to KNOW that you will not get your elk until the year 2016 if you apply now, or would you prefer to have a chance to get it this year? That's what it boils down to IMHO.

I would think most people like having the chance to get their draws each and every year.

Does Alberta have a combination of the round robin and lottery system? Like they run the draw as in BC for most of the tags, then take a few off the round robin list if they haven't been successful since they first started applying? Maybe that would keep more people happy.

[wetcoaster]

I agree with reach,

I hate hearing about guys who have been putting in for 25 years and got nothing but I would hate even more to go to the other system. I also really question the draws that these hunters have been putting in for and their true understanding of statistics. If you choose to put in where the greatest population is competing for the fewest draws you are less likely to be successful. Those willing to travel and therefore work harder for their animal in general do well in the draw and are rewarded for the increased investment it requires.

Each year I put in for the draw there is a chance I will be successfull and by choosing to go further and work harder I can increase my odds. I would much rather have that chance than be told in 12 years I will be able to hunt an elk in my back yard. As I understand it this system is prevalent on public land in the U.S. and in many areas the only people in the bush are old timers because they have put in enough time in the system to finally be drawn.

[brotherjack]

As a guy who has put in for LEH tag's every year, and has NEVER gotten drawn for anything - not even a stinkin' whitetail doe - I definitely understand the frustrations. And no, I don't put in for high odds areas - other than for moose, I have never put in for a draw with odds higher than 4:1. I've put in for a doe tag in an area that's almost 1:1 ever since I've been putting in for tags, and never got it.

I'm not sure of the answer, or even if there is one.

Personally, I like the idea of past successful applicants being denied a tag for a few years following their draw. I don't think it would kill revenue all that much if successful applicants got disallowed for a few years after being drawn.

Speaking of revenue - is the LEH revenue really even a significant portion of what is taken in every year compared to other sources? I don't know the answer to that - that's an honest question.

Also, if we're going to worry about LEH revenue, what about all the guys who quit giving money to the LEH because of their lack of success year after year after year (a group which I will likely join real-soon-now if I don't get at least that doe in the nearly 1:1 odds area I always put in for). I've hung around with more than a few old-timers who are in that boat. That's no doubt a good chunk of lost revenue right there also which might well counterballance a bit if they did something to tip the odds more in favour of the hunters who have previously not been drawn - and the widely used method of removing past successful applicants from the draw seems a very "fair" way to do it.

Anyway, just rambling...

I would rather have a better chance of being drawn and then having to wait a few years to draw again, than I would the current system.

[youngfellla]

I agree with reach,

I hate hearing about guys who have been putting in for 25 years and got nothing but I would hate even more to go to the other system. I also really question the draws that these hunters have been putting in for and their true understanding of statistics. If you choose to put in where the greatest population is competing for the fewest draws you are less likely to be successful. Those willing to travel and therefore work harder for their animal in general do well in the draw and are rewarded for the increased investment it requires.

Each year I put in for the draw there is a chance I will be successfull and by choosing to go further and work harder I can increase my odds. I would much rather have that chance than be told in 12 years I will be able to hunt an elk in my back yard. As I understand it this system is prevalent on public land in the U.S. and in many areas the only people in the bush are old timers because they have put in enough time in the system to finally be drawn.

100% agree. Well said.

[Frosty]

I could see that if you recieve a draw, a couple year break for that person in that species would be a step to increased odds for others. But i think at the end of the day it doesn't really matter what ideas there is because revenue rules.

[Steeleco]

I sort of understand the way they do things in BC, but as another guy that's NEVER been drawn for anything in 12 years, I just treat things like the 6-49 and I buy tickets for that twice a week and get nothing there either!!

[Seeadler]

Well, I think that BC should move to a system similar to Alberta's except modified so that say 75% of tags go to those with the highest priority, while the remaining 25% are drawn from everyone that applied.

Leave Bison, high odds Sheep, and maybe Roosevelt Elk on a straight lotto. Maybe make these once in a lifetime hunts to remove successful applicants from the pool.

And, require those buying LEH applications to at least buy a hunting licence.

[Krico]

I think the system we have is pretty good. We can apply for whatever species we want, wherever we want. The draw is just that-a draw. There are no guarantees. And to anyone who's planning on not buying and entering cards anymore, go ahead-that'll just increase the odds for the rest of us!

[CNE]

I recently read the publication on the leh site about how the draw works and I think its very good system.http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wild/documents/leh_system.pdf

[30-06]

yea i know of someone who has gotter elk in the kootneys 6 years in a row

[RiverOtter]

The current LEH system in B.C. is primarily designed to maximize revenue.....obviously. So any changes that might jeopardize that are unlikely.

That said, I can live with "lucky hunters" and the reduced odds system, as the whole purpose of LEH is controlled management of a resource. What doesn't sit well with me is wasted draws by guys that don't even buy a tag and hunt the species they were drawn for. A cross reference should be done post season to determine if a tag was purchased by the successful applicant, and if not, they should be disqualified from drawing that species any where in B.C. for "x" number of years.

As well as "reduced odds" for successfull applicants, I see no reason why we can not have an "increased odds" system for unsuccessfull applicants, providing they apply for the same draw they were unsuccessfull on the previous season. Every year they are unsuccessfull for the same species/M.U., their odds increase slightly. The "increased odds" system would give unsuccessful applicants a greater advantage over successful applicants as well as first timers and previously successfull applicants who have just re-aquired even odds.

All in all, I think the system we have is acceptable, but it could use a little more tweaking to distribute the draws more evenly.

RO

[quadrakid]

i keep reading in different threads how guys who have been putting in for island elk for 25 years are pissed off. the fact is the odds for these coveted draws are not in your favour at all. if your odds are 50 or 70 or90 to one that means your chances are real slim , in fact you may never get drawn in your lifetime. it,s a numbers game. i get tired of guys whining about not getting to take a day trip and get there elk. i can,t find one guy in my travels here in the campbell river area who wants to hunt elk bad enough to buy a tag and head for the rockies. if you want to go elk hunting go elk hunting! see you in elk country in sept! elk tags are 25 bucks at your local island sp-orting goods store.
.

[Frosty]

That said, I can live with "lucky hunters" and the reduced odds system, as the whole purpose of LEH is controlled management of a resource. What doesn't sit well with me is wasted draws by guys that don't even buy a tag and hunt the species they were drawn for. A cross reference should be done post season to determine if a tag was purchased by the successful applicant, and if not, they should be disqualified from drawing that species any where in B.C. for "x" number of years.
RO

But sometimes plans change for people. They buy the cards with full intentions but then something pops up and the plans change......

[tmarschall]

As well as "reduced odds" for successfull applicants, I see no reason why we can not have an "increased odds" system for unsuccessfull applicants, providing they apply for the same draw they were unsuccessfull on the previous season. Every year they are unsuccessfull for the same species/M.U., their odds increase slightly. The "increased odds" system would give unsuccessful applicants a greater advantage over successful applicants as well as first timers and previously successfull applicants who have just re-aquired even odds.


Otter.... there are those people who think that IS your current system. There is an "increased odds" feature to your system, but the odds go back to even after a year or two. What I think you are trying to say is basically the point system, where your odds continue to increase until you are drawn. If you were drawn a previous year, that does not mean you have no chance of being drawn the following year. It simply means if it is an area that is very popular, your odds of being drawn after being drawn the previous year are greatly reduced, but you do have a chance. As far as revenue, increasing the odds of being drawn for everyone should actually increase revenue... not decrease revenue.
This is not the first discussion on this topic for sure... maybe sooner or later this discussion will result in some action to implement some changes... good luck eh!!!

[CanuckShooter]

What I would like to see is a 'calf moose only' tag that is good for the general season...so you don't have to hunt like a madman during the current openings [oct 10-25]along with every other hunter from across the country.

Or, perhaps a tag that permits more doe deer to be harvested, that would not permit you to harvest a moose/ and or elk if you bought it.

With a little creativity there could be more options put into the mix to create more opportunities. We spend hundreds of dollars just for fuel to travel north each year and hunt moose....and here we live right in the heart of moose country. We would pay more for a moose tag that was good at or near our homes rather than pay the gas companies...or even harvest less desireable animals [does/cows] leaving the so called trophy animals to the antler hunters if the options were available rather than travel half way across the province when we shouldn't have to.

The current LEH...the longer I play the game the more I think it's just some big scam. Now don't get all offended...but odds are odds, and when six of us apply for goat at 1.1=1 odds [and I know that's based on last years applicants] you would think one of us would get 'lucky'?? Then the next year is shows 3.2=1 odds...and again none of us get drawn, something is fishy. It means that there are 3.2 applicants for each available tag....which means there are 6.4 applicants for the 2 available tags...now remember there are six of us...so who the heck is getting the tags?? It must be that .4 person?? Some pretty lucky soul don't you think getting two goat draws for the same year while the rest of us are unsuccessful? Pretty fishy.

[wetcoaster]

As far as revenue, increasing the odds of being drawn for everyone should actually increase revenue... not decrease revenue.

How do you suppose this happens without increasing the number of animals taken? It does not matter how you slice it the odds don't increase for everyone. They are just allocated differently.

Some food for thought about the statistics:

Lets say hypothetically an area has 40 draws for elk and 1000 hunters put in for the draw each year. That gives 25:1 odds of getting drawn. Now lets remove the 40 hunters who recieved the draw from the picture the next year as many of you suggest, the odds for the draw the next year are now based on 960 hunters going into the draw. How much do your odds change? They are now 24:1. In fact lets exclude all the hunters who are successfull for a five year period for that M.U. and species (40 draws X 5 years = 200 hunters). The odds after five years will be 20:1 providing no other hunters come in and take up the slack for those that are excluded.

What about this waiting your turn idea that has been suggested that is used widely in the states and in Alberta? Do the math, again 1000 hunters want an average of 40 draws for elk each year in our hypothetical management unit. If you put in each year you can expect to wait 25 years between draws.

To change the odds dramatically in your favour by an exclusion system in popular M.U. hunters would have to be excluded for a very long time. How long do any of you want to be excluded if you are drawn? In a wait your turn system you may be dead by the time it's your turn. In this hypothetical unit if you managed to live to 100 years old and started entering when you were 1 years old you would get 4 draws.

In the current system in any given year you have a "FAIR" and random chance to be drawn at the odds for the M.U. and species you enter the draw for and I'll take that chance each year over the alternatives. I said "FAIR" this is true throughout most of the current system except for the shared hunt system for the Moose draw, that as of now hunters can legally cheat fairly effectively. If we wanted to change the system for the better it would be to change the rules for the group hunt draws to clean up the rampant cheating.

[bighornbob]

Canuck Shooter

At 3.2:1 odds your your chance is less then 33% that you will get a tag. All of your buddies had the same odds. Unless you did a group hunt every tag had the 33% chance of getting drawn. Those are still poor odds.

If you think the system is rigged apply for a hunt that has less then 1:1 odds a few years in a row and I bet you will get drawn.

BHB

[ARC]

I agree that something has to change. I think that successful applicants' odds should be affected for several years after being drawn. In the current system their odds are reduced by 50% the first year, then continue on as normal.

Perhaps the system isn't "rigged", but it does seem that certain people are always getting drawn and others not. I know somebody who in the last 5 years has gotten 3 bison draws, 2 kootenays bull elk, and 2 bull moose draws. The best of these odds was the bull moose at 22:1. I know a few people like this, who never go a year or two without getting a big draw.

On the other hand my hunting partner and and his kids put in a combined 18 draws a year, and not horrible odds (alot of them does and cows), and have gotten nothing in 3 years.

I just think something could be set up to ensure the draws are more evenly distributed. If someone gets a bison draw, reduce there odds for the next 5 years. Maybe reduce it by 75% the first year, and gradually increase their odds over time.

I personally can't complain too much since most of the draws I put in for have horrible odds. However, I did put in for a 1.3:1 goat draw 2 years in a row and never got it, whereas my hunting partner got it 3 years in a row.

[dana]

The fact is BC hunters have things way too good. You don't need to draw a tag to hunt here. The LEH is just bonus tags is all. You guys should see what hoops the Yanks have to go through just to hunt. Could you imagine paying several thousand dollars per year in applications in multiple states and still get no tags. That is the reality down there. It really is hard to bitch and moan about our system when we have the best hunting opportunities of any jurisdiction in North America.

[wetcoaster]

The fact is BC hunters have things way too good. You don't need to draw a tag to hunt here. The LEH is just bonus tags is all. You guys should see what hoops the Yanks have to go through just to hunt. Could you imagine paying several thousand dollars per year in applications in multiple states and still get no tags. That is the reality down there. It really is hard to bitch and moan about our system when we have the best hunting opportunities of any jurisdiction in North America.

Amen brother,

ARC,

read my post on page 2 where I go through the numbers, what you suggest will not appreciably improve your odds especially for bison! There will always be lucky hunters in the system as that is the luck of the draw. The shared hunt system for Moose in it's current form is unfair as it can be easily abused and cheated. Some hunters that seem very lucky are taking advantage of certain problems with this system.

[tmarschall]

How do you suppose this happens without increasing the number of animals taken? It does not matter how you slice it the odds don't increase for everyone. They are just allocated differently.

Wetcoaster.... I have to explain my point in more detail... maybe then you can see my point. This can be a very confusing topic, but I will give it my best shot.

First of all I will have to agree that the current system is fair as you say. I don't understand all the ins and outs about the group hunting advantage (cheating), but I will accept it as you say. It prolly needs some tweeking. As fair as the system is currently... the only problem is that there is a mathematical possibility that a person will never be drawn. The number of animals being drawn for is ever changing, it is not a "constant" that is a given. The number of animals or tags in the draw do not really affect the chances of being drawn, it only affects the odds. That and the number of hunters putting in for that particular LEH.

So lets get started on the hypothetical LEH where we have 1,000 hunters putting in for 40 tags....

First year, 40 names are randomly drawn... simple enough... no previous history to change the draw...

Second year.... the 40 tags are divided proportionately .04% of the forty tags go to hunters who were previously drawn(40 once drawn hunters divided by 1000 hunters in the draw)... or 1.6 tags(.04% multiplied by 40 available tags)... round up to 2 tags... leaves 38 tags for 960 hunters who were not previously drawn.

Third year... now things really get interesting.... 2 hunters have been drawn twice in a row. 76 hunters have been drawn once, 922 have never been drawn. Again the 40 tags are divided proportionately. The two hunters who were drawn twice are divided by number of hunters.. equals .002% multiplied by 40 tags equals .08, which is less than one half, so no tags go to those two hunters. The 76 hunters who were drawn once get .076% of the tags, or 3.04 tags, round down to 3 tags. The never drawn hunters get a chance at 37 tags.

Fourth year, we have 5 hunters who have been drawn twice, 110 hunters who have been drawn once. 885 who have never been drawn. The 5 hunters who were drawn twice share .002% of the tags, or once again zero tags. The 110 once drawn hunters share .11% of the tags or 4 tags. The never drawn hunters get a chance at 36 tags.

Fifth year we have 9 twice drawn hunters, they get .009% of the tags, or once again zero tags. The 142 hunters who have been drawn once get .142 % of the tags or 5.68(round up to 6 tags) The 849 hunters who have never been drawn get a chance at 34 tags.

6th year, we have 15 hunters who have been drawn twice get .015% of the tags, or .6 tags, round up to 1 tag. The 170 hunters who have been drawn once share .17% of the tags or 6.87(round up to 7 tags). The 815 hunters who have never been drawn get a chance at 32 tags.

And so it goes every year. There is a mathematical formula too complicated to post here that will show you that every hunter WILL be drawn in 30 to 40 years. Comparing to a true elimination drawing, it would take 25 years for all 1000 hunters to be drawn. But once drawn, hunters would never apply again, thus lost revenue... bad system.

More significantly, under the current system, in the same 40 years, only 500 of the 1000 hunters could be drawn. Even with the weighted average in the second year that the current system uses, the number only increases to 750 of the 1000 hunters being drawn in 40 years. @50 hunters have a good chance of NEVER being drawn!!

Under the point system I described above, after 6 years, a hunter would have a 1 in 15 chance at drawing for a third tag. If you think about it, for an area where the entry level odds are 25 to 1, the odds are not that bad. The bottom line to this kind of point system is a guarantee that you will eventually be drawn, something the current system can not offer. Also, the system I described can be tweeked to make it more attractive to repeat customers. Instead of dividing the tags proportionately, weights can be assigned to each category, for example, as above in the second year, you could triple the proportion for previously drawn hunters to .12% of the tags, which would give 5 hunters a shot at a second animal. Once it is shown to hunters that they will eventually be drawn, I think more hunters would continue to apply and not loose hope. Guaranteeing a successful draw eventually can not be any worse that the current system.... unless you are one of the lucky hunters who have been drawn for bison 3 times in last 4 years!!! Food for thought!!!! Tom

[Krico]

The fact is BC hunters have things way too good. You don't need to draw a tag to hunt here. The LEH is just bonus tags is all. You guys should see what hoops the Yanks have to go through just to hunt. Could you imagine paying several thousand dollars per year in applications in multiple states and still get no tags. That is the reality down there. It really is hard to bitch and moan about our system when we have the best hunting opportunities of any jurisdiction in North America.

x2

We not only have the greatest variety of big game species available in any one province/state, there are open season NOT rerequiring an LEH for every one of those species with the exception of bison, grizzlies and Dalls. Worst case scenario you have to travel a few hours to an open area. Please stop whining people, we've got it pretty damn good! And to those who think it is just a big scam, there are far too many people we all know every year receiving tags. Some guys always seem to get lucky. Some guys never do.

[oldtimer]

Well as one who has submitted cards for a long time and only been drawn once for a mulie doe There is only one objection I have about our system and that is : why should somebody who puts their status number on the top of their LEH card have almost 100% odds and I can't get one ???? I might be opening up a can of worms here but it needs to be said. Mike

[CanuckShooter]

Canuck Shooter

At 3.2:1 odds your your chance is less then 33% that you will get a tag. All of your buddies had the same odds. Unless you did a group hunt every tag had the 33% chance of getting drawn. Those are still poor odds.

If you think the system is rigged apply for a hunt that has less then 1:1 odds a few years in a row and I bet you will get drawn.

BHB

Our first year applying the leh synopsis showed 1.1 -1 odds...seven of us sent in cards none got an leh...the second year it showed 3.2-1 odds which makes sense as there were seven of us that we know of applying for the TWO draws available. In order to get those odds wouldn't it mean that there were 6.4 applications for the two draws????the first year we applied???

[CanuckShooter]

Well as one who has submitted cards for a long time and only been drawn once for a mulie doe There is only one objection I have about our system and that is : why should somebody who puts their status number on the top of their LEH card have almost 100% odds and I can't get one ???? I might be opening up a can of worms here but it needs to be said. Mike

And do you think any of them actually do this?? If you hold status you don't have to follow the seasons or regulations except in the case of a protected species?? I think a bigger concern should be the allocation between resident hunters and guide outfitters.......if you got the bucks they have the tags to sell you....

[Krico]

Keep in mind fellas that the number of authorizations changes from year to year. If you send in 3 applications one year, and are told the odds were 3:1 then try to make sense of the numbers the next year when there are say 10 draws, it won't work.

[tmarschall]

the second year it showed 3.2-1 odds which makes sense as there were seven of us that we know of applying for the TWO draws available. In order to get those odds wouldn't it mean that there were 6.4 applications for the two draws????the first year we applied???

Canuckshooter.... as I understand math... you are correct. Just who was that .4 person is a real mystery. To get 3.2:1 odds, there had to have been 15 people trying for 5 tags... or some factor there of...(30 people trying for 10 tags etc). But then again, I heard years ago that the average family here had 3.2 kids. Maybe two of those .2 kids grew up, got Canadian citizenship and applied for the LEH (along with 6 whole people) to get 6.4 people!!!!

[oldtimer]

Canuck. I know it happens as they brag about it. One less moose or deer or elk for the whiteman. Mike

[cwocarsten]

You are not alone in the unlucky dept. I have had no LEH Moose/Elk in 14 yrs. Hmmmm coincidence that 14 yrs ago I wrote a letter to Fish & Wildlife suggesting they change to the Alberta draw system. I got a 4 page letter back explaining just how fair their system is (except for me). Maybe it can be because I fill out those hunter Q's telling them I have bagged my elk or moose in regular season. Makes me want to go Hmmmmmmmm.

[CanuckShooter]

Canuck. I know it happens as they brag about it. One less moose or deer or elk for the whiteman. Mike

Hi Mike...or just maybe...I had a fellow tell me one time he applies for a moose and grizzly LEH every year just so he can save the animal from being shot! He ticked me off...so I tell him that he should quit wasting his money..eh?? he says...well I just up and shoot every damn grizzly bear I see I tells him...so your wasting you money if you think that getting an leh is going to save 'em.

Sometimes natives get a kick out of peeing you off with those statements...just because it bothers you...all in good fun.

[CanuckShooter]

Canuckshooter.... as I understand math... you are correct. Just who was that .4 person is a real mystery. To get 3.2:1 odds, there had to have been 15 people trying for 5 tags... or some factor there of...(30 people trying for 10 tags etc). But then again, I heard years ago that the average family here had 3.2 kids. Maybe two of those .2 kids grew up, got Canadian citizenship and applied for the LEH (along with 6 whole people) to get 6.4 people!!!!

Tmarschall>>well now...I just never thought of that?? It's possible I guess?? [harharharbigbellyjigglinlaugh]