Colorado's new big game season structure: Submit your ideas!
- Thread starter live2huntelk
- Start date
eye in sky
Active Member
I hope they give a certain percentage of tags to those who have the most points and the rest in a random draw.
OregonJim
Very Active Member
Perhaps one of the math gurus could crunch some scenarios?
If a tag lottery were instituted and folks with max points got those points converted to "additional chances" until drawn, then points scrubbed upon drawing, with no new points issued, would it be fair and equitable?
Would it at least be better than a system with point creep.
A slight chance would still be possible at a premium tag for a min point holder (not unlike random draws). The premium tags would still be weighted toward the folks who have the most points. The folks who are only interested in one specific tag wouldn't get the piece of mind of knowing, that a given number of max pointers would draw and be scrubbed, but those same guys would have the knowledge that they might draw that coveted tag a second time, rather than go to the back of the PPT line never to draw.
Shoot holes in it if this is crazy!
Musket Man
Veteran member
This is what I came up with for Nevadas bonus point system. http://www.eastmans.com/forum/showthread.php/6773-Bonus-point-drawing-odds
OregonJim
Very Active Member
One way to make it fair on a random drawing is split tags, half for random, half for true PP. The true PP requirement numbers offer insight to the FMV of the tags. The guys who random draw cannot enter a draw for the species in the entire state for the time equivalent to the highest pt total that drew in the true PP system. that would make things interesting. 
NDHunter
Veteran member
I hope they leave the point system as it is. Tons of guys can chase those top units while allowing me to draw some darn good units with only 2-3.
Say they went to a straight random draw. The top units are probably going to be 1 in 500 so the odds of drawing are still ridiculously bad. If somebody's built points for 20+ years, I say they deserve the tag when they finally draw it.
Say they went to a straight random draw. The top units are probably going to be 1 in 500 so the odds of drawing are still ridiculously bad. If somebody's built points for 20+ years, I say they deserve the tag when they finally draw it.
Musket Man
Veteran member
Its interesting to look at the points and who drew in NV. Some follow the apps points pretty well and some are all over the place. I was trying to figure my odds for drawing in NV this year and thats what I came up with, although when you compare it to the actual draw Im not sure it helped my situation much. lolNo wonder those guys at the top haven't drawn they are just plain unlucky !!!!!!
OregonJim
Very Active Member
Sorry!!!!
I guess you were one of those guys
They really would need to weight the system perhaps squaring the points or creating a split quota.
Musket Man
Veteran member
The points are squared. No Im not one of those guys, I only have 4 points. LOLSorry!!!!
I guess you were one of those guys
They really would need to weight the system perhaps squaring the points or creating a split quota.
ColoradoV
Very Active Member
- Oct 4, 2011
- 820
- 941
Change Elk to draw only all methods of take. Anytime you draw a tag, buy a leftover, or hunt a cow/doe your points go to 0 and poof point creep solved. Too many hunters want their cake and eat it too. Just look what draw only did for deer and it would do the same for elk. LO vouchers need to use points - for guys like me who have friends that give me a tag for free every year - well I should not gain a point as well.
Point banking is a terrible idea with little merit. It did not work the first time and will not work the 2nd time. The outfitters are pushing this tested and failed idea more than anyone at this point. Any idea the CPW chooses should do 2 things - the most good for the most hunters and should not negatively impact other hunters. Point banking in reality negatively effects most hunters while doing little good in the "real" world to reduce point creep.
Funny for to me that with the amount of points builders out there that still hunt every year - anyone thought that the highest end Elk tag would be a reality in the current system - if you did not start with max points... It never was and never will be. Colorado is about opportunity the CPW will tell you that.. If you are looking for a 400" bull in Colorado well then you are looking in the wrong state no matter if you have 500 points right now.. It is not the place of CPW to manage for opportunity then change the entire system caus some hunters cant figure out how to apply for Elk in states like Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Montana, and Nevada where you can actually find a big bull.
DOW told the truth the entire way and high point gather type did not look at the stats. In reality the high points gathers want to be "bailed out" for their decision to CHOOSE to gain points on the backs of hunters who CHOOSE to hunt. Low points holder never will effect the top end gathers negatively but if point banking comes back the high point gathers will with out a doubt negatively effect the low point hunters.
I dont think it is the place of the CPW to bail out hunters who made their choices. I see too many hunters dont want to work and just want a 350" bull or 200" buck dropped whole in the back of their truck. If you have over 3 points for either elk or deer and cant find the size of animal I listed above - the points system is flat out not the problem..
It will be interesting to see what they do.
Point banking is a terrible idea with little merit. It did not work the first time and will not work the 2nd time. The outfitters are pushing this tested and failed idea more than anyone at this point. Any idea the CPW chooses should do 2 things - the most good for the most hunters and should not negatively impact other hunters. Point banking in reality negatively effects most hunters while doing little good in the "real" world to reduce point creep.
Funny for to me that with the amount of points builders out there that still hunt every year - anyone thought that the highest end Elk tag would be a reality in the current system - if you did not start with max points... It never was and never will be. Colorado is about opportunity the CPW will tell you that.. If you are looking for a 400" bull in Colorado well then you are looking in the wrong state no matter if you have 500 points right now.. It is not the place of CPW to manage for opportunity then change the entire system caus some hunters cant figure out how to apply for Elk in states like Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Montana, and Nevada where you can actually find a big bull.
DOW told the truth the entire way and high point gather type did not look at the stats. In reality the high points gathers want to be "bailed out" for their decision to CHOOSE to gain points on the backs of hunters who CHOOSE to hunt. Low points holder never will effect the top end gathers negatively but if point banking comes back the high point gathers will with out a doubt negatively effect the low point hunters.
I dont think it is the place of the CPW to bail out hunters who made their choices. I see too many hunters dont want to work and just want a 350" bull or 200" buck dropped whole in the back of their truck. If you have over 3 points for either elk or deer and cant find the size of animal I listed above - the points system is flat out not the problem..
It will be interesting to see what they do.
Last edited:
BKC
Very Active Member
I think preference point banking would work if you implemented it for 5 years. One year was not enough. It was not enough to get people to take a gamble. You would still be able to chase the higher end units if you wanted and you could chase 3 good hunts in 5 years if that is what you wanted to do. The outfitters endorse this preference point banking so more hunters would draw halfway decent tags and hopefully hire them for that "big hunt", although if tag numbers don't change, I don't see how they would get that much more work out of it. I am glad I burned my 21 points last year !!!!!!!!!!!
Colorado Cowboy
Super Moderator
On the states website there is a section for input for the next 5 year plan. It also has some stat of the points situation. I looked them over and there was some very eye popping numbers there. There are a couple of elk hunter that have over 25 points, I think one was 28! Can't understand why that even is allowed to happen as there are no units that even require that many to draw. I am going to print the stats out so I have them to look at later.
Granby guy
Active Member
l
I just don't see how point banking could possibly reduce point creep. Colorado basically has 3 top tier units (2,10,201) with a combined total of 136 tags for all seasons which currently take an avg. of 19 res. pts. and +\- 21 for NR. There are currently 850 residents and 1,759 NR's with 18 or more points for a total of 2,609. So 2,609/136 = 19 years for just these point holders to draw out and that isn't taking into consideration the 80/20 split. Then there are about 5 mid tier units (1,40,61,76,851) with a combined quota of 1,324 for all seasons with an average of 11 pts For residents And 17.8 pts for NR. There are currently 4,711 residents and 7,877 NR holding between 11 and 17 points essentially qualifying them to draw the mid tier units if that is all they applied for. So 7,884 + 4,711 = 12,595/1,324 = 9.51 years. So if the people with 18 or more points decided to bank points they could accumulate enough points to be in contention for the mid tier units long before the current point holders could draw out. Point banking would dramatically increase the mid tier units while having little impact on the top 3 units. The problem is that there just aren't enough top tier units or limited units for that matter, to have any impact on point creep. I'm in favor of squaring your preference so everybody has a chance.
BKC
Very Active Member
Isnt the weighted point system we have on Sheep, Goat, and Moose basically the same as a squared point system? The longer you are in the better chance you have to draw because your name is in more or your points grow at a faster rate than someone a year or two behind. I drew out my sheep and goat tags before the weighted point system started, and I'm glad I did. I have drawn all my big hunts when and where I have wanted to except Moose. Moose is the only tag I cannot draw and it is the only animal that I put in with weighted points, which I have the maximum. Coincidence? I do not like weighted points and don't think I would like squared points. I am burning my 14 points on a bear hunt this year because I believe the point system is going to be changed big time. I am about two years from a very good high country buck tag but I have a feeling I am going to get the rugged yanked out from under me on this tag.
Granby guy
Active Member
They could but you would be amazed at how much small town economics plays a part in how the local game herds are managed. If areas that currently host +/- 6,000 hunters were to become limited areas that only allowed 500 hunters the local economies would suffer tremendously. There have been numerous proposals to increase the number of limited areas but all have failed due to the outfitters and chamber of commerce raising hell.
Colorado Cowboy
Super Moderator
Musket Man
Veteran member
All that is true enough but if the areas are over hunted to much for to long and the hunting gets to bad all those hunters are going to stop coming anyways. Like alot of areas in Idaho that have been hit hard by wolves. There are plenty of tags but not many hunters or animals to hunt anymore.
Granby guy
Active Member
MM,
I understand but we have had unlimited bull tags for years but still manage to maintain a 20/100 bull ratio. But I agree that if the opportunity disappears so will the hunters.
I understand but we have had unlimited bull tags for years but still manage to maintain a 20/100 bull ratio. But I agree that if the opportunity disappears so will the hunters.