Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Umpqua River, Oregon
    Posts
    2,245
    Thanks
    348
    Thanked 466 Times in 288 Posts
    Congratulations
    11
    Congratulated 7 Times in 5 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by D.Turvey, Jr View Post


    Gentlemen,

    I am very happy to see we have such an astute audience! Please reference the most current chart above that was printed in the beginning of each MRS in the journals. When we wrote those states, it was prior to the state having any solid idea of final dates. Note the asterisk in Utah's Deadline Date column and the chart title, then read the note at the bottom of the chart. If the deadline was not final at the time of printing, then we are left to assume the results timeframe is not final as well.

    We try to provide the most current information we can but when our print deadline is before or at the same time as the state's deadline, you can see the problem. I am terribly sorry for any confusion but these charts are the most accurate we had at the time of printing. You can always email me if you need further help or clarification at: Dan.Turvey@Eastmans.com
    The problem with that explanation is that Utah has released its draw results in late May for years, so based on the history of prior years, "late May" would have been a better anticipated date. Utah charges credit cards before it posts results and in 2012 it was hitting credit cards on May 20 and in 2013 on May 14.

    I have seen a few areas where I think the Eastman's MRS needs improvement:

    1) Accuracy and Editing: There are OFTEN simple things that like season dates and draw dates that are incorrect. There needs to be a better system of editing and proof checking. I recall a table a few years ago that a large proportion of the season dates were incorrect. I seem to recall it was the Wyoming deer or antelope MRS.

    2) Hunt unit ratings: I have often seen unit ratings (blue, green, yellow) that leaves me wondering if the guy doing the write up really understands the units they are providing advice on.

    3) Waiting for state reg info to publish: Eastman's often publishes MRS info before the state regs some out. That routinely results in inaccurate info. One of Eastman's main competitors waits until the info is out and tends to be far more accurate in their data. Yes that does lead to a crunch at publishing time, but it's better to have the right info than flawed info.

    4) Missing hunts: By trying to jump the regs coming out, often new hunts and units are not even mentioned in the MRS.

    I hope Eastman's takes this to heart. This is meant to be constructive, as these are the areas I have routinely seen errors in the MRS.
    Grand Slam #1005 + 2: Dall (1986 Yukon), Fannin/Stone (1987 Yukon), Bighorn (1988 Colorado Unit S-26), Stone (1995 British Columbia), Desert (2001 Nevada Unit 161), Bighorn (2009 Wyoming Unit 5)

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Umpqua Hunter For This Useful Post:


  3. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    395
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 112 Times in 82 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I had a long diatribe about the MRS but deleted it because I like the mag and the guys there seem to be regular joes. What I will say, figure out the draws fellas 'cause you're not good at it.

    One blatant example is the WY PP graphic:

    Wyoming Preference Point Allocation Elk License Allocation (Resident vs. Non-Resident)
    Using an example of 100 total tags available, the
    preference points pool gets allocated 75, and those
    without points are in the draw for the remaining 25.

    Every app is in the PP draw, even those with zero points. All apps remaining after the PP draw are in the Random draw, with a new random number.

  4. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    The Cowboy State!
    Posts
    17
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The non-res drawing odds for New Mexico are about as inaccurate as you can get in the mrs..........

  5. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    395
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 112 Times in 82 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    In their defense, they do a "first choice success" not really an odds report but I haven't been able to recreate their numbers.

  6. #15
    Eastmans' Staff
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    160
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 126 Times in 56 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Thanks for the feedback guys. The results date for Utah is incorrect on that chart. Somehow we picked up the old results date from before they moved their draw deadline back a few years ago. It should be in fact "LATE MAY." All the others should be correct. NM just released their results this AM at 10:00 MST, it being the 23rd of April I think "LATE APRIL" fits that bill. Some states hedge their bets on result dates and give the public a worst case scenario just in case they have trouble getting the draw completed or the meetings go on longer than expected. I know WY has released as much as two weeks prior to their "published" results release date.

    As for some of the other issues, we work as hard as we can to keep the information as correct as possible. Just keep in mind, most of the information in the MRS is well over a month old by the time you see it in your mailbox and the states are getting better at changing things up at the last minute or mid stream with the onset of the internet and web applications instead of paper. Three times I have been given small errors by WY that where later changed when their information went public on their website.

    When it comes to draw odds in different states it can get extremely complicated and they all handle the inner workings of their draw process a bit differently. The states that have "max NR tag percentages" are impossible to calculate accurately. When they yank all of the Non-residents out of the pool at certainly points, like 5% or 10% it creates a very complicated figure to try and wrangle around with. And if they don't supply the number of R and NR applicants in that tag pool, it can be almost impossible to accurately calculate. So in some cases, such as NM, ID and AZ a general, "average draw odd" on first choice applicants is about as good as it gets.

    As for the NM draw odds, they came directly from the NM state statistician. She has access to variables that are not made public, making it tough/impossible to replicate her figures with given public information.

    Wapiti's summarization of the WY chart is more incorrect than the chart is. There are a few words in that diagram that need changed, but the main information is correct enough for the 99.9% of the readers and what they want to know. Of the 100 NR tags available to NR hunters, 45 would go to PP "Regular" draw applicants, 30 tags would go to the PP Special applicants, while 15 tags would go into the hands of random "Regular" draw applicants and 10 tags would go to the "Special" random draw applicants. A different outcome can occur if the number of applicants does not exceed the number of tags available and it does make a slight difference as to the order that they conduct the drawing at times. But for the most part, that is how the draw allocation breaks down for a vast majority of the best elk areas with the hard to get tags. I will work on firming up that verbiage to clarify it further for next year.

    Again, just bare in mind, that most of this information can be almost two months old by the time it hits your doorstep. The printer needs 10-14 days to print and bind the publication and the USPS needs 21 days or more to deliver the book to your doorstep, particularly if you are on either coast. Our moto is: we would rather have it in your mailbox with a few minor inaccuracies at least 30 days prior to the draw deadline, than take a risk and have it delivered even one hour after the draw deadline has already passed.

    I hope this helps to clear up some of the confusion.

    G-
    N. Guy Eastman
    Publisher
    Eastmans' Hunting Journals

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Guy For This Useful Post:


  8. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    936
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 44 Times in 36 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Umpqua Hunter View Post
    The problem with that explanation is that Utah has released its draw results in late May for years, so based on the history of prior years, "late May" would have been a better anticipated date. Utah charges credit cards before it posts results and in 2012 it was hitting credit cards on May 20 and in 2013 on May 14.

    I have seen a few areas where I think the Eastman's MRS needs improvement:

    1) Accuracy and Editing: There are OFTEN simple things that like season dates and draw dates that are incorrect. There needs to be a better system of editing and proof checking. I recall a table a few years ago that a large proportion of the season dates were incorrect. I seem to recall it was the Wyoming deer or antelope MRS.

    2) Hunt unit ratings: I have often seen unit ratings (blue, green, yellow) that leaves me wondering if the guy doing the write up really understands the units they are providing advice on.

    3) Waiting for state reg info to publish: Eastman's often publishes MRS info before the state regs some out. That routinely results in inaccurate info. One of Eastman's main competitors waits until the info is out and tends to be far more accurate in their data. Yes that does lead to a crunch at publishing time, but it's better to have the right info than flawed info.

    4) Missing hunts: By trying to jump the regs coming out, often new hunts and units are not even mentioned in the MRS.

    I hope Eastman's takes this to heart. This is meant to be constructive, as these are the areas I have routinely seen errors in the MRS.
    Umpqua, you should have your own magazine. I'd subscribe for sure.
    Arise... Kill, Eat! - Acts 10:13

  9. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    colfax, wa
    Posts
    4,913
    Thanks
    1,115
    Thanked 572 Times in 501 Posts
    Congratulations
    26
    Congratulated 5 Times in 5 Posts
    I understand it is difficult to get the MRS put together with the latest info when some states put out the past years stats and info so close to the draw deadline, and still get it out to us in time to be useful for the draw. I also understand putting that much info together accurately without any errors is difficult as well. You guys do a great job with the MRS but I do notice errors in many MRS's that could be easily corrected (example there are several incorrect season dates in the Nevada MRS). I would be willing to volunteer to help with going over the MRS before it goes to print.
    Keystone 1, Over!

    " I am lost in the dust of the chase that my life brings"

  10. #18
    Eastmans' Staff / Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Powell, WY
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 38 Times in 25 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Musket Man View Post
    I understand it is difficult to get the MRS put together with the latest info when some states put out the past years stats and info so close to the draw deadline, and still get it out to us in time to be useful for the draw. I also understand putting that much info together accurately without any errors is difficult as well. You guys do a great job with the MRS but I do notice errors in many MRS's that could be easily corrected (example there are several incorrect season dates in the Nevada MRS). I would be willing to volunteer to help with going over the MRS before it goes to print.
    We very well may take you up on that.
    Managing Editor
    Eastmans' Hunting Journals

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to D.Turvey, Jr For This Useful Post:


  12. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Bend, Orygun
    Posts
    395
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 112 Times in 82 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I don't usually take things personal, but then sometimes I do.

    Straigt cut n paste from the 2014 WY MRS, as posted above:

    "Wyoming Preference Point Allocation Elk License Allocation (Resident vs. Non-Resident)
    Using an example of 100 total tags available, the
    preference points pool gets allocated 75, and those
    without points are in the draw for the remaining 25
    ."

    The fact is, every app is in the PP draw regardless of their point total, including those with zero points.
    Another fact: "All apps remaining after the PP draw are in the Random draw, with a new random number."

    I didn't address the individual special/random breakdowns because they weren't part of the MRS sentences I quoted. I could have clarified the "all apps remaining" to include "for a given hunt" but didn't. If you think I'm wrong on my two statements above, I'd be more than happy to be in a conference call with you and Millissa Raner of the Dept. And while were on the phone I can have her explain the NR draw process to you so you publish accurate GEN elk odds instead of simply cut n paste off the draw reports like everybody else does.
    Last edited by WapitiBob; 04-23-2014 at 07:12 PM.

  13. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Allegan, MI
    Posts
    1,076
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 242 Times in 198 Posts
    Congratulations
    2
    Congratulated 2 Times in 2 Posts
    WB---Can I assume in your last comment you're referring to where the last several years the MRS has stated that applicants that pay the special price and put the general tag for their second choice have about a 2 out of 3 chance of drawing the general tag? In fact, the actual stats show that the last few years those applicants have all drawn a tag and in 2013 some even drew it as their third choice. Thus the 2 of 3 chance statement is way off! I would also have to agree with you that what has been stated in referance to your comment is incorrect and makes it appear that whoever is doing the Wyoming stats needs a little more time or information to know how the draw works. I don't know of anyone out there that knows more about the Wyoming draw system than you do and I know from our conversations that a lot of your knowledge has been obtained from direct conversations with Wyoming staff that run the draw.
    PS: I also noticed that one set of stats above in one magazine shows the draw results for NM as late June and the other is accurate in that it is in late April.
    Last edited by Topgun 30-06; 04-23-2014 at 08:49 PM.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •