CA zone X9a

[Muleys 24/7]

Has anyone drawn X9a or G39 and if so, how many points did you have?

[Kevin Root]

650 tags for X9A last year, a whopping 5 tags in 2011 for G39. It took 8 points as a low in 2010 to pull a G39 tag but 2 points was the lowest for X9A according to last stats I saw on the CA F&G site.

Hope your able to pull the tag Muleys 24/7. I've never drawn or put in for either of the zones. I just wanted to wish you the best of luck in the draw in 2012.

[Muleys 24/7]

Thanks for the info, I should get drawn for utah general deer this year so after I see utahs results, I'll know if I should put in for X9a......or maybe hold off till I rack a few more points up for G39.

[BigSurArcher]

Keep in mind... unless you have max points, you are no different than a guy with zero points for tags like G39. All of the preference quota goes to max point holders only, and everyone else is left with the random quota. The CA draw system is pathetic.

[dustyboots]

I agree that the CA points system is pathetic. Since CA doesn't offer enough tags on limited entry units vs the amount of applicants you are screwed if you are not in the max point pool and often times it is impossible or near impossible to make it to the max point pool since there are not enough tags to purge the system. If you're not in the max points pool its cross your fingers for a random draw tag. In my opinion they should offer a system that has a higher percentage of random tags allotted maybe like Utah or Nevada's system but also still reward people for consistently applying.

[Muleys 24/7]

That's rite, you guys are 100% correct. I aways put what ever X zone first just to build points and maybe hit one of them on the random draw if I get lucky. If there's no luck I always end up with a local D zone. Califorina really needs to get their crap together, I wish they would just shut a few of the local zones down for a couple years. If they were to do that we'd have alot better odds for hunting a trophy, but that'll never happen cause they're all about the money.

[Drhorsepower]

I don't think it's pathetic. It is very similar to Colorado. I really like the way Cali does it actually!! I think guys that have been putting in longer should get the tag, or a better chance anyways. I also like the 10% going to non max points. Can't help on your zone but all of the info you asked for is in the booklet.

[dustyboots]

I don't think it's pathetic. It is very similar to Colorado. I really like the way Cali does it actually!! I think guys that have been putting in longer should get the tag, or a better chance anyways. I also like the 10% going to non max points. Can't help on your zone but all of the info you asked for is in the booklet.

While California's system is very similar to Colorado's system the difference is Colorado issues enough tags/permits that you can foresee when you may be able to realistically draw a tag. The problem with the system in California is that there are not enough tags vs the number of applicants so if you are not already in max pool you are unlikely to see a LE tag unless there is a drastic change in the number of tags, you get extremely lucky or the drawing system is changed take for example elk hunt 305 in 2010 there were 3390 applicants, 938 having max points which would get 12 tags and 3 tags going to the random draw. So if you have max points your odds would be 1.27% and after the preference quota there are 3378 applicants left for the remaining 3 random tags. At the current tag quota is would take 79 years to clear the max point pool so if I am not that pool I am unable to ever realistically have an opportunity at 80% of the available tags even for missing an application for one year since the systems inception. I agree that people who have been applying longer should have better odds than others who have not been however this is a broken system unless you are in the max points pool. Why should people new to the sport/state even attempt to build points if there is no way they can realistically get in the max points pool even within a lifetime? This only one example there are countless other when you look through the big game digest.

[BigSurArcher]

I think guys that have been putting in longer should get the tag, or a better chance anyways. I also like the 10% going to non max points.

What about the younger hunters that will never ever have a chance at a good tag unless they miraculously draw in the "random" pool? It's not their fault that they were born when they were. It's really gonna look stupid down the road when the only people getting tags are those with 25 or more points, and then everyone with 0-24 points have EQUAL odds for the random tag(s). How on earth is that fair? I think it should be a system like Nevada's where your number of points is multiplied by a set number and that's how many chances you get in the draw... that way the people who have applied the longest still have the best chance, but younger hunters or late-bloomers still have hope.

[Muleys 24/7]

What about the younger hunters that will never ever have a chance at a good tag unless they miraculously draw in the "random" pool? It's not their fault that they were born when they were. It's really gonna look stupid down the road when the only people getting tags are those with 25 or more points, and then everyone with 0-24 points have EQUAL odds for the random tag(s). How on earth is that fair? I think it should be a system like Nevada's where your number of points is multiplied by a set number and that's how many chances you get in the draw... that way the people who have applied the longest still have the best chance, but younger hunters or late-bloomers still have hope.

BigSurArcher, I have to agree with you being that I would be considered a younger hunter and you too, It would take me a LONG time to reach 25 points. I know Califorina Bighorn desert sheep and Elk will be even harder to draw with so few tags, for example my buddys dad has been putting in for bighorn desert sheep for many,many years without being drawn and now age is working against him.