Colorado read and react
General Topic
Contributors to this thread:
[email protected] 24-Jan-23
kscowboy 24-Jan-23
Jethro 24-Jan-23
Bow Bullet 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
Bow Bullet 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
Bow Bullet 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
sticksender 24-Jan-23
sticksender 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
LUNG$HOT 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
cnelk 24-Jan-23
LUNG$HOT 24-Jan-23
Orion 24-Jan-23
LUNG$HOT 24-Jan-23
smarba 24-Jan-23
[email protected] 24-Jan-23
Grey Ghost 24-Jan-23
whipranger 24-Jan-23
LUNG$HOT 24-Jan-23
whipranger 24-Jan-23
LUNG$HOT 24-Jan-23
Franzen 25-Jan-23
cnelk 25-Jan-23
redneck hunter 25-Jan-23
South Farm 25-Jan-23
Jaquomo 25-Jan-23
Medicinemann 25-Jan-23
Orion 25-Jan-23
[email protected] 25-Jan-23
Hackbow 25-Jan-23
Medicinemann 25-Jan-23
Medicinemann 25-Jan-23
24-Jan-23
DENVER - Colorado Parks and Wildlife is considering changes to policies and regulations that direct the distribution of big game hunting licenses in Colorado. To help inform this process, CPW is looking for input from residents and nonresidents interested in big game hunting in Colorado.

CPW is encouraging the public to complete this comment form and share their thoughts on the current big game license distribution process. The comment form will be open through February 20, 2023. Results from this comment form will be shared with the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission to inform their decision-making process on big game license distribution.

Changes that are being considered: A preference point banking system Averaging group applicant preference points Updating the high-demand hunt code split from 80% to residents and 20% to nonresidents to 90% for residents and 10% for nonresidents An across-the-board license allocation of 75% to residents and 25% to nonresidents These topics under consideration were requested by the CPW Commission. The results of the comment form will be discussed with the Commission at its March 15-16, 2023 meeting.

Go to the CPW website for more info and to make comment

From: kscowboy
24-Jan-23
Group averaging could be a great way to help clear the PP pool. However, the unintended consequences could be a guy like on another forum who is a NR yet hunts WY's premier units every year. This could be a great way for a parent to get their kids a quality hunt without having to wait years and hoping they have the time and interest when it's time for the kid to finally draw.

The other issue is having grandma, great aunt, etc. all building points so a family member can hunt every year. There is a right way to do this. Just look at all the exploited loopholes in neighboring states and address these. Say if it's a X+ point unit, you are ineligible for a drawn tag for 2 years? There is a penalty box for sheep and would be easy to do here too.

From: Jethro
24-Jan-23
I like point averaging, but it does not clear the PP pool. Not even close.

From: Bow Bullet
24-Jan-23
How does point banking work? Never lived or applied in a state that has it so I'm not familiar with it.

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
We tried it here in Colorado a while back say if a unit is 5 points and a guy had 10 he could hunt the point unit for 5 points +1. So he could use 6 points to hunt and bank his other four points

From: Bow Bullet
24-Jan-23
Thanks Orion. Must have been before I moved to CO. Why was it ended?

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
Not positive but I believe CPW claimed it didn't affect point creep very much was their reasoning, its been a while so someone can correct me if i'm wrong. Also not sure how they came to that conclusion as they only did it for one year I believe

From: Bow Bullet
24-Jan-23
That was my first reaction, wouldn't do anything for point creep. Anybody else have any pros or cons to it?

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
It could do something. If they do implement it I would like to see it run for a whole 5 year season structure, if for nothing else but to get some definitive data on how much affect it has on points and point creep.

From: sticksender
24-Jan-23
One of the problems with the proposed changes is to open up the system to playing games by using multiple friends and family members to apply & buy points (even ones who don't hunt), and thereby jump ahead of others to hunt your unit repeatedly through group apps. You can be certain this will happen, as it does in other states like Wyoming. People even brazenly advertise to pay others with high points to join their group app. I've seen offers posted on MM several times.

From: sticksender
24-Jan-23

sticksender's Link
Submit your feedback at the link. You have to register to do so.

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
Your confusing point averaging and banking.

From: LUNG$HOT
24-Jan-23
Point averaging may help the point creep issue a bit but definitely not a “solution” to the issue. Point banking will hurt the creep issue for sure. All the highest point holders will then be able to go hunt a lower/middle tier unit AND retain a pile of points. Simple math. I see a ton of folks every year who spend 9/10 points on 3-4 point units just because it happens to be the year they can get off work or the whole family can go together etc… I’m absolutely against point banking. You’ll have guys with 20+ points now hunting 1-2 point units several years in a row and they’ll retain a pile of points. How would this help creep??

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
how many guys with 20+ points do you think will be cashing in for 2 point units?

From: cnelk
24-Jan-23
Point Banking was in 2007/2008 if I remember correctly. It was only for one year.

I participated in it.

From: LUNG$HOT
24-Jan-23
“how many guys with 20+ points do you think will be cashing in for 2 point units?“

Probably several because they’ll still have 17 points after hunts on 2 point units. They won’t have to “cash in” all their points to hunt these lower tier units. Now instead of 600+ guys with 20 points they still have high point totals and a lot more guys on the other side of the spectrum (0-2 points) will lose out being able to hunt the low point LE units they choose every year or every other year. It bumps those low end units up in points needed to draw. Will turn a 0-2 point unit to a 1-3 point unit real fast.

From: Orion
24-Jan-23
If your a resident and do this your stupid. The ones I know with more than two brain cells will hunt a unit like 76 twice

From: LUNG$HOT
24-Jan-23
Orion, yes I agree and was just using that as an example but even if you hunt 76 twice it will have the same effect on (in your example) 76. It will cause point creep in that unit 100%. They’re a ton of point holders in the middle of “no man’s land” 7-15 points who will undoubtedly hunt lesser units several times and WILL cause point creep in said units. It’s inevitable.

From: smarba
24-Jan-23
Agreed Lung$shot. As the # of points has increased in top tier units to where people realize they will never reach it, many have begun opting to hunt a lesser unit and then get out of the system. With point banking they might be able to hunt a lesser unit 2-3-4 times before getting out. That will increase the creep in those lesser units...

24-Jan-23
a recommendation from the Commission per Point Banking. Not only use the required PP for the unit, let say 5pp, but then be charged an additional number of points, lets say 3-4 pp, for the application. So a 5 pp area might cost one 8-9 PP or more, for a 5 PP area. I agree, Point Banking will increase point creep in the low PP areas for sure. I also do not support PP averaging.

From: Grey Ghost
24-Jan-23
Hard no on point banking and averaging for me, as well.

Matt

From: whipranger
24-Jan-23
Point banking would be great. And I think it will help point creep it may take a few years but there are so many guys in no mans land the could hunt a fair unit twice and be out of the game. I have 25 points for elk and would burn them as fast as possible in a 4-6 point unit several years in a row and be OUT OF THE POINT GAME. And yes there will be the cry babies that say now I can’t draw a hunt I had planned on next year, but if it eventually slows the creep why the F NOT

From: LUNG$HOT
24-Jan-23
Whip- The ONLY people banking helps is the people on top of the pile. While those top tier guys hunt LE units several years in a row the train wreck and onslaught or people still collecting points in the lower levels adds up extremely fast. The only way banking will help creep is to simultaneously stop everyone from collecting more points under them and we all know that’s not going to happen unless they turn everything to a draw and stop the ability to hunt OTC AND collect a point. This problem has solutions but none that fit the agenda of the money hungry CDOW.

From: whipranger
24-Jan-23
I’ve said several times let’s stop points ! give point holders 5 years to use what they have and allow banking. After 5 years go to 100% random draw. During the 5 years split the tags 80% to point holders 20% to non holders in random separate draw.

From: LUNG$HOT
24-Jan-23
^^^ I wouldn’t hate that. With the exception that residents should always have an OTC option.

From: Franzen
25-Jan-23
CO is about the last remaining real opportunity state for the NR. It's possible I may not wind up elk hunting anymore, but I'd hate to see that go away for those that wanted that opportunity like I did. Changing it up such that an NR can only get an OTC tag every other year, or even 1 out of 3, would be a great option to keep the opportunity alive and reduce the hunting pressure. Also, another good alternative would be to make OTC reduce your point total by one (make it 2 if you want to reduce the point pool further). If you have 10 points you go down to 9, but if you have 0 it doesn't matter (stay at 0).

I realize this concept is about more than elk, but that is CO's largest draw opportunity.

From: cnelk
25-Jan-23
We all know Point Banking and Point Averaging wont happen. These topics are just buzz words to distract from the other bigger issues.

25-Jan-23
I think if you get a tag at all, except a true "left over" tag you could walk in and buy because no one wants it, you should have to use ALL your points. Basically if you hunt, your points are gone.

I think the Wyoming thing is a farce also. I think group points should be put at the lowest point holders total. Legalized selling of points.

I agree about folks buying points for family members and using them to draw every year being an issue. I know a guy that hunts Montana who takes a rotating group of 3 guys to always have points built up. If your gonna allow that, just allow bidding on tags and let a guy pay whatever he can afford to draw the tag he wants. At least it would be out in the open.

From: South Farm
25-Jan-23
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but hunting loses its luster when I need to have a full-time CPA and lawyer on retainer just to kill an elk.

From: Jaquomo
25-Jan-23
At least with a fixed point system there is some predictability to the planning and draws. It also allows low point units to remain low point units. With banking, the entire system will turn upside down for a few years. For someone like me pushing 70 with limited years left for hard hunts, I don't want to see that happen.

People got into the game knowing the rules. Now changing the rules in midstream because some don't like the game anymore? BS.

Then there is the weighted point fraud. It makes it possible for someone with 3+1 (my hunting partner) to draw while someone with 3+20 (me) does not. They need to fix this before they start tinkering with some sort of banking system.

From: Medicinemann
25-Jan-23
I got a phone call from a friend last night. He had just been contacted by a "hunting company". Apparently, they screen all hunters that have a high number of preference points (I don't know if this applies to residents, as my friend is a non-resident for the state that he was contacted about). They have a significant number of "high end" hunting clients (for whom money is not a consideration) that hunt year after year, despite being in a draw only state. Since point pooling is allowed, by incorporating one "High PP" hunter into a given pool of hunters, apparently they are able to elevate the average point total to a level where the other hunters can hunt far more frequently than would normally be expected. Why would a high preference point individual agree to such a proposal?....because the hunting company has an incredible area, apparently magnificent accommodations, AND the high PP hunter gets to hunt for FREE.

From: Orion
25-Jan-23
Must have been Wyoming that system is pretty prevalent there

25-Jan-23
Most of this is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Supply of tags and areas are way below demand. We can change who gets disappointed but there isn't a real fix.

From: Hackbow
25-Jan-23
Thanks for the heads-up about the form, Paul.

Regardless of which direction CO goes, any new policy will be unfair (or perceived to be) to some. What if the point system were revamped for Residents only and we great, unwashed, NR's had to draw for every unit? I haven't looked at the numbers, but consider this scenario:

1 - Give a 2-3 yr notice, then freeze all point accumulation for everyone (additional pts can be attained during this time).

2 - Allow all point holders at 7 or 8 (this is arbitrary but illustrates the idea) and above 5 yrs from freezing to use their points. Point holders below the threshold will be offered a buyout of their points or credit for future licenses, permits, etc.

3 - Using historical data, assign a value to each unit. For example the top 5/ units are #1, next 10 are #2, next 20 are #3, next 20 are #4, and balance are #5 (again, just the framework of the idea)

4 - As the point holders above 7 or 8 burn their points on units during the 5 yr period, begin implementing a system where anyone can draw for any unit, but limit their ability based upon the unit value. For example, if Joe draws his desired #1 unit, he then cannot apply in #1 or #2 units for 5 yrs.

5 - Residents can apply every year and successful NR's can hunt every other year at most. Instead of points, weight successful/unsuccessful draws for individuals so that no NR will hunt every year, nor will they be unsuccessful more than 3 yrs running.

6 - Treat group/party hunt applications pretty much the same way they are now. But once a draw is successful, all in that party are subject to the limitations of individuals.

7 - Allocate 85% for residents and 15% for NR's. Raise Resident fees slightly and NR fees to where needed to compensate for the loss of the OTC revenue.

There are definitely a lot of moving parts, but something along these lines would give heavy preference to residents, honor those that have held points for years, maintain revenue rates, still allow biologists to determine management goals of each GMU, destroy the failed point system, allow the average guy a chance at top units, reward those that are serious and deter those that aren't as committed.

I'm sure I'm missing something, but with the right tweaks this seems like a reasonable way to allow everyone a chance at decent units, not punish any one group of folks too much during the transition period, and maintain correct management of the resource. Any merit, or am I off my rocker?

From: Medicinemann
25-Jan-23

From: Medicinemann
25-Jan-23

  • Sitka Gear