# 4 Rivers Weighted Lottery



## Anchorless (Aug 3, 2010)

Anyone else get the email?

Sounds like a rational, common-sense idea and approach to the 4 Rivers Lottery. Please comment before March 15 and let them know you approve (or disapprove) of the lottery. 

I'm also going to add a comment that local (Idaho) boaters should have additional applications in the lottery as well.


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

I'm not sure if Buzzards, want to start working on advocacy, but as long as the water is low I would not mind compiling comments posted to this thread and submit them. Here's the email in case you did not get it...



Dear Four Rivers Lottery Applicant,

The Four Rivers Lottery Group is exploring the potential of moving to weighted lotteries by the 2015 floating season. A document has been posted on our website discussing some details about how weighted lotteries might be developed. 

We want to know what you think of the idea of moving to a weighted lottery in general, and specifically by each river.

The best way to share your opinions and ideas is to send an email to: [email protected] with a subject line that starts with “Weighted Lottery”, or you can send us a letter at: Middle Fork Ranger District, HC 63 Box 1669, Challis, ID 83226, or fax it to: 208-879-4198. To be most useful to us, please submit your comments by March 15, 2013.

To help us quantify your responses, please tell us whether you support or disapprove of a weighted lottery and identify which river(s) your comments are directed towards.

A detailed description of our proposal is on our website at: Salmon-Challis National Forest - Recreation Passes & Permits . 

In a separate document, also posted to our website, we have prepared some FAQs for boaters who have more questions. At the end of the FAQs you will find the application statistics for the past few years.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

I don't like that you have to apply EVERY year or lose your points. It will just encourage frivolous apps and lost dates for those that are serious. If they are a knucklehead and do this for an Aug 15 date or later, then that's really crappy. What's an alternate solution? Allow up to one year break in those 9 years? That doesn't seem like it would have much negative of an impact on the plan, but give people a tiny bit of leeway. 

Otherwise it seems pretty good to me.


----------



## Anchorless (Aug 3, 2010)

I agree. 

I honestly don't see what the problem would be with having a weighted lottery that doesn't require applicants to apply every year. 

If I apply for the MFSR every year from 2015-2019 and lose, I have 5 "points" accrued... let's say I take 5 years off from applying... well, I've still missed out on 5 consecutive years of drawing a permit. 

I don't see why we should have to apply every year.


----------



## John_in_Loveland (Jun 9, 2011)

*4 Rivers Weighted Lottery - To the Buzz Forum Adminstrators*

It would be really nice if someone could start a set of "Talking Points" on here that we could all comment on. The goal would be to find common ground and then we could all use the talkiing points to submit our personal comments. Comments on regulations are judged on the number of comments received and how many make similar comments.

To the Buzz Administrator...what would be the best way to accomplish this?


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Anchorless said:


> I agree.
> 
> I honestly don't see what the problem would be with having a weighted lottery that doesn't require applicants to apply every year.
> 
> ...


I think it is to reward the people that actually are trying regularly, and avoid "banking" and using those in a few cherry picked years. If everyone can just rack their points up and up, then what's the point as the majority of people will have a ton of points? This favors those that apply all the time (which I do) and so I favor it. I just don't favor it 100%. The ghost date, even if it is only allowed to be used every other or every 3rd year, would help cull out the fair weather folks.


----------



## Anchorless (Aug 3, 2010)

Ah, good point.


----------



## salmonjammer (Dec 14, 2011)

so on the Grand Canyon preferance for unsuccessfull applicants goes away, and the Salmon/Selway it starts?? Anyone know the rational for doing away with it on the Grand?


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

I have a friend who has applied for a Main Salmon and Middle Fork permit every year for 20 years without drawing a permit. I'm betting he would love this idea!


----------



## kwagunt2001 (Jun 9, 2008)

*A change I would like to see*

I've been applying for these darn things for 20+ years now and what I would like to see is an option on the application of:

"would take ANY date between xx/xx/xx and yy/yy/yy."

As far as I understand it I could be, theoretically, the 5th person picked in the lottery out of 1000s of applicants and not get a launch because the previous 4 people received all of the lotto dates that I had applied for. I know this is the case with the Grand and probably Idaho too.


Would like to consider the pros and cons of this "just give me any date if I've won the lotto" option.

Mike


----------



## avondan (May 5, 2011)

A weighted lottery sounds good on the front end, but what if you draw during the first year (which is good!). Are you willing to be at a disadvantage (less points) for every year thereafter until most or all the boaters in front of you go down the river? Seems to me that there's nothing more fair than pure randomness, where everyone has the same chance to draw. 

The odds went to crap when applicants could put in for all 4 rivers instead of just one.


----------



## dirtbagkayaker (Oct 29, 2008)

kwagunt2001 said:


> I've been applying for these darn things for 20+ years now


 
Yep! I think this is a common story! I feel that if a weighted system comes, people would need to put in for 20 years just to get a shot. 

IDK, I kinda like it just the way it is. everyone has the same chance every year.


----------



## codycleve (Mar 26, 2012)

As an avid hunter I have been dealing with a weighted lottery for tags in oregon my whole life.... In the oregon hunting lottery its weighted so that the people with the most points draw first then the trickle down effect... It has got to the point where most of the best tags are once in a lifetime... the wenaha unit for elk takes 16 points to draw.. so 16 years of unsucessful draws... if you where a child putting in now you will never draw it in your lifetime.. you can also put in for what are called point savers which I think would be an awesome idea if we did go to this... In oregon if you dont apply one year you lose all your points.. but say your best friend is getting married when you go, you can apply for a point saver.. still cost money to apply and you still gain a point, but without any chance of drawing. I personally like the suspense of not noing weather im going to draw.. and knowing I have just as much of a chance as the next guy... I think the point system is great to start with especially if you got on board the first year it started... but if you where a new rafter five or ten years down the road it would be discouraging knowing that all these people are ahead of you.. I also feel for those people you have 20 plus years of not getting a permit but I also know they go on trips with other people all the time.


----------



## codycleve (Mar 26, 2012)

this sytem they are talking about implementing is obviously better than the oregon weighted hunting lottery but what happens when your group reaches the top of the pool.. you have 3 people with eight points and you all draw... there goes all your points and your back too the bottom for eight mnore years and you got one float out of it. the point saver could help here.. if you know you have several people at the top of the class have one put in or two put in for a point saver soo that your not all sent to the bottom of the pool again..


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

It would be nice if they included some sort of penalty for anyone who applies for a Middle Fork launch after Aug. 15 and then cancels it (you can't pick up cancellations after this date). Since they are effectively wasting a launch date for everyone, I would favor a one year penalty once they start applying for the Middle Fork again. They can still apply the next year, but they don't accrue a bonus chance for that year.
Since I and my friends have been applying for a MF permit for many years (some as many as 20 years) without a draw, I would be ok with increasing my odds, even if it's just a one time deal. Then after that, we just go back to applying, being denied, and getting our usual post season permits. At least I'd have one regular season MF trip before I'm too old to go, or rowing that big river in the sky.


----------



## Jacknife (Mar 11, 2011)

I have no problem with a weighted lottery if the playing field was level. I have heard of people spamming the lottery with multiple email accounts to ensure they get a permit. I think some type of validation of ID with a reward or penalty in the weighted system would be good.


----------



## Avatard (Apr 29, 2011)

Jacknife said:


> I have no problem with a weighted lottery if the playing field was level. I have heard of people spamming the lottery with multiple email accounts to ensure they get a permit. I think some type of validation of ID with a reward or penalty in the weighted system would be good.


You must be referring to spamming a weighted lottery ---- I'm not sure how that could work in the existing lottery. Your recreation.gov account has a real name associated with it that has to match your drivers license. I think they would catch on if they saw 124 applicants named Avatard T. Jones.


----------



## Jacknife (Mar 11, 2011)

All I know is I was talking to some guy at a ski shop, and he said that is how he guaranties his permit. He may have been talk s---, I don't know. It would make me feel better if the forest service was smarter than that, but I have little faith in government.


----------



## Avatard (Apr 29, 2011)

Jacknife said:


> All I know is I was talking to some guy at a ski shop, and he said that is how he guaranties his permit. He may have been talk s---, I don't know. It would make me feel better if the forest service was smarter than that, but I have little faith in government.


Well it could be a private run lottery but then you would only draw a permit if you were connected to someone

As i recall on the grand you can't be an alternate TL on more than one permit so they must track this


----------



## sarahkonamojo (May 20, 2004)

I waited 10 years for my first Grand permit... They now seem much easier to get through the weighted lottery. At least through the available launch date/secondary lottery...
I have been applying in the Four Rivers Lottery for 20+ years and never "won" a permit. I have had better luck with pre-permit season launches and late season cancellations.
Are the same people getting permits every year? I kind of like the idea of a weighted lottery, but not sure if it will make a difference.
S


----------



## avondan (May 5, 2011)

Here's one way to look at the benefits (or lack thereof) for a weighted lottery, using the Selway data. There has been an average of 2838 applicants annually for the 62 slots permitted each year. That results in a 2.1% chance of drawing. Over the next 10 years, you can get 620 permittees down the river, leaving 2218 people remaining in the applicant pool with max points. Those people in year 10 have a 2.8% chance of drawing. That's not much of an improvement over the non-weighted system for the folks with max points, but those that follow (or draw and re-enter the application pool) see a much reduced chance of drawing. Carry that out to 20 years and the odds only increase to 3.9% for the folks with max points, but 19 years of folks following have been screwed by having their odds reduced. Interestingly enough, after 20 years of points, there will still be 1,598 of the people who got in on the front of the weighted lottery that have max points and still have not drawn. 

Where's the benefit?


----------



## paulk (Apr 24, 2006)

here is a controversial thought, can we have more than one selway launch per day?


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Avondan- I think the benefit is that some will drop out as they don't apply every year. I would think this is going to be less of a factor in the Selway, as that does not draw as many boaters and they tend to be a bit more dedicated to boating. People drop out of boating too, how many people do you know that have been putting in for MF/Selway for 20 years? Not a heck of a lot. I think the MF sees a lot more erratic permit apps, and they will lose points faster. And ultimately it is still a lottery, I won a Grand permit with only 2 points in the main lottery two years ago.


----------



## Anchorless (Aug 3, 2010)

Remember, they are only doing this (right now) on MFSR and Selway, so there's always the Main and Hells to draw. We've actually been pretty lucky, as someone in our group has drawn on the latter each of the last 4 years. However, no such luck on the MFSR or Selway.

I agree that the downside of this system is that if you do draw then you can pretty much count out drawing again for a long time, but as avondon shows... the odds aren't that few. I would only add that it is likely the number of permits will go up each year, thus reducing those odds respectively. 

My other issue is that once they start tinkering with "weighted" lotteries - instead of purely random lotteries - what other factors might they be obligated to include? Veteran's preference? Handicapped? Age? I would urge them to consider a local's preference as well... just because.


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

Anchorless said:


> I would urge them to consider a local's preference as well... just because.


On the Rogue the "Local preference" is to drive over the the ranger station and pickup a day of cancellation.


----------



## odawg (Apr 2, 2011)

*Agree*



paulk said:


> here is a controversial thought, can we have more than one selway launch per day?


I think one launch per day on the Selway is not the best management of our public lands. I feel the Selway can be kept in pristine condition while allowing more boaters to experience the river.


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

It would be nice to know what percentage of folks who put in for a MF or Selway are one time/sporadic applicants, and what percentage are regular applicants every year. It would give a better perspective on what the trends have been. As for the odds....it's still a lottery and somewhat of a crap shoot. I think about the Main Salmon permits my group has pulled in the last ten years..... The guy who has applied every year for 20 years has a perfect 0 for 20 record, I'm 0 for 10, another person is 1 for 10, and the other 3-4 permits we've gotten have been one time or sporadic applicants. Who the heck knows???


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

The USFS notes “The goal for our lotteries is to keep the drawings random, yet allow for better odds for those applicants who apply every year.” They also note “First of all, there will be no change in allocation; the same number of private permits will be issued as in the past. Second, not all rivers are inclined to move to a weighted lottery. The Snake and the main Salmon rivers do not have as much demand as the Selway and the Middle Fork of the Salmon rivers, so they may keep their lotteries as is. Third, the weighted lotteries the Forests are considering at this time would still be based on a random drawing.” 



More details include “The Middle Fork and Selway Rivers are considering a weighted lottery that, in essence, would add a duplicate application into that river’s drawing for each year the applicant was not previously successful.”
Then there is this:


“Applicants will be *required* to enter *every year* to carry forward their extra chances, no exceptions. Skipping a year will result in all extra chances being zeroed out.

“When an applicant is successful drawing a permit reservation in the lottery, their extra chances will be zeroed out for that river, regardless of whether the reservation is used, no exceptions. Cancelling a reservation due to high or low water, no road access, or smoky conditions will not entitle the person to get their extra chances back.

Let’s go through this one step at a time:


Step One: By saying “First of all, there will be no change in allocation” the USFS is saying to the commercial river runners that they get to keep using the public access the USFS has given them. Now would be a good time to ask the USFS a few questions about the allocation. Are the commercial river trips using all of their allocation? If not, is there a mechanism to transfer unused allocation to the self-guided pool? More importantly, is there still any justification to be giving guaranteed public access to an oligopoly in the first place? Would a common pool lottery be a better idea? 



Step Two: By saying “The Snake and the Main Salmon rivers do not have as much demand as the Selway and the Middle Fork of the Salmon rivers, so they may keep their lotteries as is” the USFS is saying there is increased demand for self-guided river permits. Is there similar demand for commercial trips? What data is available to compare the demand for river trips?


I just got my Cascade Outfitters 2013 catalog in the mail by the by. The self-guided river runners are dropping a huge amount of money into the regional economy, and no longer can we justify the old school allocation approach. 



So, once we have asked the allocation question, we need to look at carrying capacity. Rivers where carrying capacity has not been exceeded have a permit in a rocket box at the put-in, as the Lower Salmon still does (last I checked… is this still the case?). 



Where access is regulated to protect the resource from overuse, a number of mechanisms are in place to decide who gets to go. They include allocation free models like the Deschutes, and allocated models like the Main, Middle Fork, Grand Canyon, San Juan, etc. These allocation models are often based on historic use patterns, not today’s actual use demand. And, historic use was often biased toward commercial use while limiting self-guided access, as in the cases of the San Juan and Grand Canyon. 



Once river access is allocated, river runners either pay to get access through a commercial company or enter a lottery or waiting list to obtain a permit. In the waiting list, where demand far outstrips supply, you will be guaranteed you will get a permit only if you live long enough. That is not the case in lotteries or in weighted lotteries. You may never live long enough to win.


Weighted lotteries can be weighted for different reasons. In the case of Grand Canyon, the weight is given to people who stay away from the river. Period. At Grand Canyon, extra lottery preference points, up to 5 maximum, are awarded to individuals who do not play the lottery and who do not raft the river. This assures that lottery winners have the least knowledge about the resource and are not up to date on the latest happening on the river. They rely heavily on other members of their group who have more up to date knowledge of the river (and who have only 1 point if they went boating last year).


Another weight, in this case a weight the USFS is considering, is awarding extra points for playing the lottery and losing. The extra points will be erased if you miss playing every year. This ensures a yearly revenue stream to the agency of individuals who will play and lose. And the USFS notes this: “When an applicant is successful drawing a permit reservation in the lottery, their extra chances will be zeroed out for that river, regardless of whether the reservation is used, no exceptions. Cancelling a reservation due to high or low water, no road access, or smoky conditions will not entitle the person to get their extra chances back.” 



That seems very draconian. You dutifully paid your fees, played the lottery for years, and finally succeeded in winning, only to have the USFS close the road due to a fire, or the road is not plowed due to a late snow, and you lose your permit extra chances, even though the trip did not launch. 



I can’t help but think the USFS needs to justify their split allocation first, before imposing yet more changes to the lottery for self-guided river runners. 



Yours, tom


----------



## screamingeagle (Jun 14, 2011)

odawg said:


> I think one launch per day on the Selway is not the best management of our public lands. I feel the Selway can be kept in pristine condition while allowing more boaters to experience the river.


One launch a day is what makes the selway so pristine and nice, it makes the MFS look like F*n Disneyland. If there were more than one a day it wouldn't be the selway river, simple as that. This will never change. You want to do the selway pay an outfitter!! (you can still bring your own boat) thats what they are there for provided by the forest service to service the public and offer a chance to experience this beautiful river.


----------



## wildh2onriver (Jul 21, 2009)

screamingeagle said:


> One launch a day is what makes the selway so pristine and nice, it makes the MFS look like F*n Disneyland. If there were more than one a day it wouldn't be the selway river, simple as that. This will never change. You want to do the selway pay an outfitter!! (you can still bring your own boat) thats what they are there for provided by the forest service to service the public and offer a chance to experience this beautiful river.


That's true, and I agree to some extent. You could double this allocation with no ramifications at all. The only bottle neck could be at Moose Creek, which could be solved with assigned camps and limiting these camps to one night? Just my thoughts.


----------



## odawg (Apr 2, 2011)

screamingeagle said:


> One launch a day is what makes the selway so pristine and nice, it makes the MFS look like F*n Disneyland. If there were more than one a day it wouldn't be the selway river, simple as that. This will never change. You want to do the selway pay an outfitter!! (you can still bring your own boat) thats what they are there for provided by the forest service to service the public and offer a chance to experience this beautiful river.


I am in no way suggesting over use, but I feel there can be a better management plan to allow more people the opportunity to experience the Selway. Imagine if all wild rivers were locked down to 1 launch per day. I am convinced there is a better balance out there that allows more use while maintaining the wild nature of the river. 
As for the outfitters, we really have a diference in opinion on why they should exist. It seems if the USFS is forcing skilled and capable boaters to hire outfitters or not boat the river, there is a real problem with the plan and a lack of foresight.


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

Does anyone have any insight to how many commercial launches are permitted on the Selway or any of the contested Idaho rivers? I was searching for the current management plan and coming up blank.


----------



## Avatard (Apr 29, 2011)

TriBri1 said:


> Does anyone have any insight to how many commercial launches are permitted on the Selway or any of the contested Idaho rivers? I was searching for the current management plan and coming up blank.


They are interspersed with the privates. I think roughly 3 commercial and 4 privates a week. When you apply for the lottery you have to select the private launch dates --- it shows the date avail on the lottery page. There is also usually a statistics page showing last years submissions. How many entries submitted for each date


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

TriBri1 said:


> Does anyone have any insight to how many commercial launches are permitted on the Selway or any of the contested Idaho rivers? I was searching for the current management plan and coming up blank.


I found this info. Salmon-Challis National Forest - Home
It shows some usage info from 2012 for the MF, and 2011 for the Main Salmon (scroll down and look at the year end info), with commercial & private launches divided out. I would image a phone call to the managing ranger districts would give you the allotted commercial vs private launches.
PS - after some digging on the websites I did find this info on the Main Salmon & MF ......Initial commercial permit allocation for the control period - Main Salmon is 330, and MF is 306


----------



## natepelton (Feb 24, 2011)

*Commercial Selway Permits*

There are 4 commercial outfitters on the Selway, each has 4 launch dates, spread out from 6/18 to end of July. The outfitters have the same dates every year, regardless of day of the week.

-Nate


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

cataraftgirl said:


> I found this info. Salmon-Challis National Forest - Home
> It shows some usage info from 2012 for the MF, and 2011 for the Main Salmon (scroll down and look at the year end info), with commercial & private launches divided out. I would image a phone call to the managing ranger districts would give you the allotted commercial vs private launches.
> PS - after some digging on the websites I did find this info on the Main Salmon & MF ......Initial commercial permit allocation for the control period - Main Salmon is 330, and MF is 306


Thanks for finding the stats on the Middle. A few interesting things to point out: 60% of lottery season permits are going to private boaters. The average trip size for a private trip is 11. When you look at commercial trips, the average trip size including guides is 23. Also commercial trips average one less day on the river. So the pro commercial argument suggests that they are getting more people down in less time with less permits than a private trip.


----------



## Avatard (Apr 29, 2011)

The dynamics of a large group of occasional tourists (like those herded down the MF by commercials) have a lot more impact then most private boaters. For that reason I've seen responsible commercial outfitters avoid taking their clients to delicate areas on the river. Its much appreciated when it happens


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

Just received this today:

Thank you for your email regarding weighted lotteries. The Four Rivers group appreciates your input. So far, over 900 responses have been received.



In April, an update will be posted at the following website: Salmon-Challis National Forest - Recreation Passes & Permits . This site also contains details and FAQs about the weighted lotteries.







Sent by:

Donna Leuzinger


----------

