Colorado Draw Changes

[Kiwi]

You may be interested in this Colorado Parks and Wildlife Draw Process Working Group discussion

Draw Process Working Group - Work Session #1

www.youtube.com

Watching the current draw recap I actually didn’t realise non resident elk and deer allocation has moved from 35 to 25%. Will be interesting to see the impact to the 2024 draw results.

 

[Mallardsx2]

There is going to be a SIGNIFICANT jump in point creep across 90% of the units in the state.

 

[Potter89]

I am looking to burn 6 deer points and plan to give myself at least a 2-3 point buffer from previous draw reports.

 

[Addicting]

I am looking to burn 6 deer points and plan to give myself at least a 2-3 point buffer from previous draw reports.

Same boat but didn’t know about it. Looks like the tag I was chasing is going to be out of reach again.

 

[Mallardsx2]

This is going to affect a TON of NR's in the upcoming draws. I almost can't believe that nobody has been talking about it.

I guess there really isn't anything to talk about. It's a done deal and instead of getting 35% of the tags we will only get 25% from now on.

*Thats after the Landowners get their cut from the pie of course. Don't be lured into thinking that if there are 100 tags that NR's will be getting 25 of those tags. Because I assure you, that isn't the case.

ALSO, at 3:35:20 they should be VERY careful on how they are discussing this going forward. A couple people in that meeting SEVERELY misspoke.....just saying. They put out some terribly bad/incorrect information there that has alarmed a TON of people. You do NOT have to apply for a LICENSE to keep from losing your points.

The current wording reads:
"If you do not apply or hold a license for that species at least once within 10 consecutive years for a bear, elk, deer, pronghorn, moose, mountain goat or bighorn sheep, your preference points for that species will be lost. Applying for a preference point for the species keeps your file active."

The wording should read:
You must apply for a preference point, apply or hold a license at least once within 10 consecutive years or your preference points for that species will be lost.

 

[Potter89]

Same boat but didn’t know about it. Looks like the tag I was chasing is going to be out of reach again.

My schedule for the next handful of years is kind of forcing me to use my CO deer points this year. If I had some more flexibility I would consider waiting a year to see the new season structure for 2025-2029 and how these changes shake out. The allocation change will surely have a large effect though and it could only get worse every year when people see what happens this year.

I am not super worried about using more points than what is required for a tag though. I would rather take the risk out of the draw and be able to plan my hunt before the results come out especially since there will be a group of 5 of us.

 

[Mudranger1]

The current wording reads:
"If you do not apply or hold a license for that species at least once within 10 consecutive years for a bear, elk, deer, pronghorn, moose, mountain goat or bighorn sheep, your preference points for that species will be lost. Applying for a preference point for the species keeps your file active."

The wording should read:
You must apply for a preference point, apply or hold a license at least once within 10 consecutive years or your preference points for that species will be lost.

It says exactly what you said except in a different order. Just arguing at this point

 

[TOGIE]

This will have an affect, for sure. But I remain confident that there will be many many hunt codes that remain easy to get for NRs. Also, NRs can still go above 25% in the draw when the Rs under subscribe a unit and there are plenty of those units and still lots of tags overall.

And it is true, the allocation is after landowner preference. So neither R nor NR are actually getting 75 and 25 of the tags. But, thanks to legislation and that may never change.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

This is going to affect a TON of NR's in the upcoming draws. I almost can't believe that nobody has been talking about it.

I guess there really isn't anything to talk about. It's a done deal and instead of getting 35% of the tags we will only get 25% from now on.

*Thats after the Landowners get their cut from the pie of course. Don't be lured into thinking that if there are 100 tags that NR's will be getting 25 of those tags. Because I assure you, that isn't the case.

ALSO, at 3:35:20 they should be VERY careful on how they are discussing this going forward. A couple people in that meeting SEVERELY misspoke.....just saying. They put out some terribly bad/incorrect information there that has alarmed a TON of people. You do NOT have to apply for a LICENSE to keep from losing your points.

The current wording reads:
"If you do not apply or hold a license for that species at least once within 10 consecutive years for a bear, elk, deer, pronghorn, moose, mountain goat or bighorn sheep, your preference points for that species will be lost. Applying for a preference point for the species keeps your file active."

The wording should read:
You must apply for a preference point, apply or hold a license at least once within 10 consecutive years or your preference points for that species will be lost.

Not sure I follow on the landowner tags, those don’t become R or NR until someone purchases the tag which happens after the draw so if anything it means more than 25% will go to NR.

 

[elkduds]

See slide @ 4.47.20. Looks like slide language reflects my sense of CPW preference for hybrid as new direction, based on discussions I heard over my time as Roundtable rep.

 

[Mallardsx2]

I'm only about an hr and half in, but I sure hope at some point they speak on that the preference point system, being the most simple so far, and then they can look at using up points if you get a List A, B, possibly C as well. No matter if it is in the primary draw or secondary draw. Maybe even reissues

I agree. If they just did this, it would fix the majority (99%) of the problem. Instead, it appears that some are too concerned with 0-points applicants having a shot at a 201-archery elk tag....

Going to a split/hybrid/weighted/bonus draw only complicates things for everyone and we lose the predictability that makes the pure preference point system so great.

This group is all over the place...They are approaching this problem from the wrong direction in my opinion. They should have FIRST addressed preference points and the reasons why the preference point creep is actually happening and how to FIX that. No more returned tags, take points for getting A-list tags, ect ect is what should be happening. They wouldn't even need to change the draw or preference point process. Very little discussion on that so far..

As Terry said: "People can't have their cake and eat it too". I couldn't agree more. Thank you Terry for bringing up a bunch of valid points and for asking for the reports showing the returned tags etc etc at the end of the meeting. I can't wait to see that data.

The dude forcing them to vote at the end was EXTREMELY annoying. Did he have a golf meeting he was late to or what? He was completely bulldozing people the whole way through the meeting.

It will be interesting to see which direction they go with this for sure.

 

[WildWill]

As Terry said: "People can't have their cake and eat it too". I couldn't agree more.

Always hated that expression. What good is cake if you can't eat it?

 

[Sandbrew]

If you look at this slide at about 46:00 there is a method to the madness and many of the topics are interlaced so more to come. I'm sure there will be many tweaks before any thing is final and then there will be time for public comment before a CWC vote. It will be months before anything is final.

Sandbrew

 

[Mallardsx2]

I can understand why they didn't speak about pref points before getting the baseline of the draw figured out. They are connected but you have to figure out the model first then figure out the details.

Terry being there was very valuable and CPW got it right when they added him to the group, along with @Sandbrew .

The reality is, they may not even need to change the model if they can just address PP's and how they are used. Personally, I would have started there. We shall see.

I was glad to hear Terry speak up about several items as well. I was very happy to hear the information he requested at the end. They pretended like it would be a hard lift to get some of that data. That made me chuckle pretty hard.

And as much as it pains me to say, Marie Haskett even started make some sense (as scary as that sounds).

 

[Iowan]

This is all especially damaging for people with 8-22 points where there are very limited options unless you accept you will not catch that tag you have always been chasing and look at tags behind you. The tag I am chasing already has one point creep each year - it will not be closer to two-point creep each year! I have 16 points which in reality is only slightly better than 8 points in regard to the additional units it makes available. If I could point bank, I would go on two 8-point archery hunts in a heartbeat. Of course, that would result in point creep in the low point units.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Always hated that expression. What good is cake if you can't eat it?

I give you a piece of cake.

You have a piece of cake.

You eat the cake.

You now do not have a piece of cake.

You can’t eat it but also have it.

 

[cgasner1]

I give you a piece of cake.

You have a piece of cake.

You eat the cake.

You now do not have a piece of cake.

You can’t eat it but also have it.

The government asks how many guns I have I say 4. They take 3. Now I only have 23 guns

 

[WildWill]

I give you a piece of cake.

You have a piece of cake.

You eat the cake.

You now do not have a piece of cake.

You can’t eat it but also have it.

Incorrect the cake is in my tummy where it belongs.


You're at a party someone hands you a piece of cake.


Then immediately tells you that you can't eat any.


Do you still want the cake?


How many parties you been to where that's the scenario? Yea none.




I stand by my stance it's a dumb saying. But wildlife isn't cake either even if delicious.

 

[Kiwi]

This is all especially damaging for people with 8-22 points where there are very limited options unless you accept you will not catch that tag you have always been chasing and look at tags behind you. The tag I am chasing already has one point creep each year - it will not be closer to two-point creep each year! I have 16 points which in reality is only slightly better than 8 points in regard to the additional units it makes available. If I could point bank, I would go on two 8-point archery hunts in a heartbeat. Of course, that would result in point creep in the low point units.

That's me with 8 points. I was hoping to draw a unit that currently takes 7 points to draw. But as you say, 2 point annual creep isn't a race you can win.

If the draw / NR allocation change means my points are worth half of what they are today I'd happily adjust my expectations. The way I look at it is points allow me to hunt the West but accept that I may not get the tag I want but at least I get a tag.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Incorrect the cake is in my tummy where it belongs.


You're at a party someone hands you a piece of cake.


Then immediately tells you that you can't eat any.


Do you still want the cake?


How many parties you been to where that's the scenario? Yea none.




I stand by my stance it's a dumb saying. But wildlife isn't cake either even if delicious.

You can’t use cake for bear bait and eat it too?