CO CPW Draw Process Working Group
- Thread starter TheGreek
- Start date
I just double checked. I misread it.I don't buy it ... literally
No way for us to wager, though.
Ee$$$01R 1pp for 100%
Ef$$$L1R 4pp for 100%
MattinCO
Member
Thanks Oak for your efforts and congrats on being chosen for the working group.
Here are my thoughts on some of the ideas already mentioned, plus a few others:
Looking forward to seeing other options and opinions.
Here are my thoughts on some of the ideas already mentioned, plus a few others:
- Resident/Non-resident: if 90/10 won't be considered, then do away with unlimited OTC for non-residents, replace it with either OTC with caps for NR or all draw for NR. Maybe there are options to further the current R/NR split down through secondary draw and leftover/reissue processes also.
- Point Banking - not a fan, unless the 'cost/penalty' for a hunter to do that is increased or changed to 25% of remaining points, rounded up to a whole point.
- Point Creep - I think it's too aggressive to have points be used for any A list tag immediately, point holders should be given a chance to use their points for a 3-5 year transition period, then could have all points be used for A list tag. I'm also not sure an A list tag is the right metric, since there are A list cow tags, maybe any tag from the primary draw is a better option. I do like the idea of not being able to purchase a point if you got a tag (like WY), but not sure if that should be any tag or just primary draw tags, etc.
- Random pool - I do like that about WY, but in order to do that in CO, the draw would have to go through multiple choices for 1 applicant before moving to the next applicant, maybe allow 3 choices like WY and NM.
- Secondary draw - agreed with points being used, as long as that draw is changed to 50% youth preference (instead of the current 100%)
- License Surrender Process: too easy as is, either needs a larger penalty (50% points used for the tag) or stricter rules about what reasons a tag can be turned back in
- Leftover & Reissue process - agreed with something needs to be done to improve this, seems like a very inefficient process to have everyone log in at the same time and try for a small number of tags. I like the random number idea.
Looking forward to seeing other options and opinions.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,616
Primary Draw: (Applicant must be in this draw to be considered for ANY license below)
Choice 1 - Takes all Points.
Choice 2 - Takes all Points.
Choice 3 - Takes all Points.
Choice 4 - Takes all Points.
Secondary Draw: (Applicant must have been in the primary draw to be considered for the secondary draw)
Choice 1 - Takes 1/2 applicants Points.
Choice 2 - Takes 1/2 applicants Points.
Choice 3 - Takes 1/2 applicants Points.
Choice 4 - Takes 1/2 applicants Points.
OTC Areas by GMU- Caped for both R and NR by GMU area. OTC licenses MUST be applied for in the Primary or Secondary draw (Choice 1-4) if they intend to hunt OTC GMU Areas.
Tag Surrender: Absolutely NO surrendering of tags for any reason. You draw it, you lose all of your points, and you hunt it, or you don't hunt it.
If tags remain after the secondary draw, they shall be destroyed due to the lack of interest in those particular tags.
Re-Issue Process: Completely Eliminated
Preference points: If you are unsuccessful in BOTH the primary AND secondary draw for an A-list tag, you will be awarded a point.
Before anyone publicly throws rocks at my face, I was a guy who got a re-issue tag this year and filled it on a great bull. Something has to be done and we all need to sacrifice something. We need to start getting people through the pipeline. Right now, the preference points and the re-issue tags are a HUGE bottleneck in Colorado.
grasshopper
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 151
Thanks for stepping up Terry. I'm excited your involved, I generally agree with you on pretty much all of it.
1. Whatever recommendations are put forth, it won't solve all "issues" for all people.
2. What irks me is when a unit goes from OTC to limited, which is absolutley an increasing trend that is likely to continue, a majority of the tags are being drawn by nonresidents. How do you solve an applicants unwillingness to spend points on a tag worth zero points? CPW says a hard cap would cost them 10 million so that is unlikely to be adopted. I would suggest 75/25 be applied to all 4 draw choices.
3. A better option is resident OTC with a cap on nonresidents.
4. When we met with CPW leadership a few months back and asked for a reduction in NR's, we suggested an optional point fee for elk to offset the loss of revenue. $5 for residents, $50 for nonresidents, 70 percent adoption rate could cover 3-4M or so and improve OTC hunting immensely for all.
The question I would ask is how will BGSS and this group split converging/crossover topics? If the commission decides to limit all OTC archery and or rifle during BGSS, seems a waste. I would hope this group provides formal input on that to the PWC, and they listen.
1. Whatever recommendations are put forth, it won't solve all "issues" for all people.
2. What irks me is when a unit goes from OTC to limited, which is absolutley an increasing trend that is likely to continue, a majority of the tags are being drawn by nonresidents. How do you solve an applicants unwillingness to spend points on a tag worth zero points? CPW says a hard cap would cost them 10 million so that is unlikely to be adopted. I would suggest 75/25 be applied to all 4 draw choices.
3. A better option is resident OTC with a cap on nonresidents.
4. When we met with CPW leadership a few months back and asked for a reduction in NR's, we suggested an optional point fee for elk to offset the loss of revenue. $5 for residents, $50 for nonresidents, 70 percent adoption rate could cover 3-4M or so and improve OTC hunting immensely for all.
The question I would ask is how will BGSS and this group split converging/crossover topics? If the commission decides to limit all OTC archery and or rifle during BGSS, seems a waste. I would hope this group provides formal input on that to the PWC, and they listen.
Last edited:
Exactly. Potential mess. The lanes need to be established early, and I think having 3 commissioners participating in the working group will help.
WapitiBob
Well-known member
It might be kind of fun watching CO institute point banking again.
Pelican
Well-known member
• Make ram and mtn goat tags similar to bull moose in that if you fill your tag, you can never apply again and add waiting period of 5-10 years if you draw but don’t fill the tag
• Add a 5-10 year waiting period to apply for cow moose and ewe sheep if you fill your tag
• Leave the MSG weighted draw as is
• Remove the cap of 5 people being called for returned MSG tags. CPW should continue down the list of applicants until someone accepts the tag.
• Increase the number of people CPW contacts from 5 to 20 for returned DEA tags that took more than 5 points to draw.
• Loss of points for any deer or pronghorn license acquired. Demand far exceeds supply for both of these species for units with public land. People should not be able to gain a point and then buy a LO voucher. By not including bear and elk there should be much less concern about loss of revenue or a decline in bear license sales.
• Keep youth preference for the second draw
• Hard no on point banking. It solves nothing.
GrantK
Well-known member
thanks for doing this @Oak
•Leave MSG alone
•Capped OTC by zones, not units for NR.
•Make it much tougher to turn in a tag
•Reissue process using either a mini draw every week or a queue-it program like ID, people like to hate but it's miles more fair than what goes on now and wouldn't be more work or cost.
•Leave MSG alone
•Capped OTC by zones, not units for NR.
•Make it much tougher to turn in a tag
•Reissue process using either a mini draw every week or a queue-it program like ID, people like to hate but it's miles more fair than what goes on now and wouldn't be more work or cost.
should be a very high priority to re work this system. I wouldn't mind a mini draw at all. if people want fair, this is the only option IMO.
Agree that the reissue is being gamed. Randomized weekly queue would keep the system honest.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,616
If the primary and secondary draws were done correctly then there would be no need for a leftover day or a re-issue day. Problem solved.
GrantK
Well-known member
I don't disagree, but I feel like the odds of CPW changing the process so much at one shot that it eliminates turned-in tags is slim, it seems like there's a huge resistance to just ripping off the bandaid and fixing things, we may get there but I bet it's an incremental, long process.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,616
I wish they would just rip that bandaid off because the entire process fees like a game of musical chairs with tags. Its getting a bit ridiculous at this point.
perma
Well-known member
Draw Working Group Kickoff Meeting
www.youtube.com
There is a draw process working group page now. As perma pointed out, meetings will be live-streamed.
perma
Well-known member
Interesting, there's two nonresidents in the group.
