Draw Process Working Group

The archery changes proposed will have the effect of only giving the best bow tags to those who bow hunt less frequently (or never).

Eliminating resident OTC archery and leaving the 75/25 Resident/Non-resident split only applying to the first choice means a resident probably won’t get a bow tag if it isn’t their first choice. If you look at the draw results you will see it’s nearly there now in the recently converted units.

The archery changes proposed will have the effect of only giving the best bow tags to those who bow hunt less frequently (or never).

Eliminating resident OTC archery and leaving the 75/25 Resident/Non-resident split only applying to the first choice means a resident probably won’t get a bow tag if it isn’t their first choice. If you look at the draw results you will see it’s nearly there now in the recently converted units.

If a modified draw is to be implemented going forward with a form of a random draw I would like to see the amount of tags issued in the preference draw remain high. 75/25 or 80/20 preference/random would be sufficient. If the draw goes to a 50/50 split it will undoubtedly accelerate point creep in all hunts including those that do not currently experience point creep.

The other issue with type of a draw if it went 50/50 is what to do with hunts that would only have 1 NR tag available? Wyoming for instance will issue that tag to the preference draw and high point holders will still get priority, but states like Utah and Arizona issue that 1 tag in the random draw. With so many high point NR applicants (25-30+) if these permits went to random applicants, those high point applicants would likely never draw those hunts. This would be something the commission will need to address if this went forward.

If a modified draw is to be implemented going forward with a form of a random draw I would like to see the amount of tags issued in the preference draw remain high. 75/25 or 80/20 preference/random would be sufficient. If the draw goes to a 50/50 split it will undoubtedly accelerate point creep in all hunts including those that do not currently experience point creep.

The other issue with type of a draw if it went 50/50 is what to do with hunts that would only have 1 NR tag available? Wyoming for instance will issue that tag to the preference draw and high point holders will still get priority, but states like Utah and Arizona issue that 1 tag in the random draw. With so many high point NR applicants (25-30+) if these permits went to random applicants, those high point applicants would likely never draw those hunts. This would be something the commission will need to address if this went forward.

This group was supposed to address the draw process and preference point creep and in 2 sessions they completely danced around the topics and didn't really make any decisions on anything other than a 50/50 split which is absolutely ridiculous.

This group is an embarrassment as 90% of them didn't even know what the splits were for tags. This is the group that is tasked with coming up with the new plan?

Offering a preference point choice OR Options 1-4 didn't make a lick of sense. Everyone it just going to put in the northwest corner for their choices 1-4 and not draw and gain a point. So, I don't see how this is reducing the amount of point holders. WHICH IS WHAT YOU WERE TASKED TO DO!

HEAR ME WORKING GROUP, AS IT APPEAR THAT NONE OF YOU ARE LISTENEING.
YOU NEED TO FORCE PEOPLE TO BURN THIER POINTS FOR ANY A-TAG . THAT IS HOW YOU SOLVE THE ISSUE AT HAND. RIP THE BANDAID OFF.

At least they decided to take points on choices 1-4. But like I said, that is just a stupid idea because everyone will just apply for high point units and STILL build a point.

This session was like watching Helen Keller lead the charge of 15 blind people across a parking lot filled will people racing their drag cars.

I expected more. So should everyone else.

Regarding the recent Preference Point Workshop meeting, I feel the comment about hunter recruitment for the Big 3 is something that the ship has sailed on. While hunters as a % of the population has dropped, the demand for these tags has NEVER been higher. I believe we need to focus on the fact that there is real fear that many of us will outlive our pref points, and we need to reward and incentivize those who have supported hunting for many decades and allow them to use/burn through their points and ACTUALLY hunt 1 or 2 of these species before they hit the dirt. Give MORE weight to higher point holders (perhaps cube points after say 15 points) and give NO chance to draw unless at least you have waited and applied for points for a min of 10 years. You have to wait that long to appreciate this hunt anyway I say. And, do not worry about simplification over what you proposed in this meeting. Montana, Ariz, Utah, Wyo, Oreg are much more complicated (esp Montana!). Thank you all for the hard work.

Regarding the recent Preference Point Workshop meeting, I feel the comment about hunter recruitment for the Big 3 is something that the ship has sailed on. While hunters as a % of the population has dropped, the demand for these tags has NEVER been higher. I believe we need to focus on the fact that there is real fear that many of us will outlive our pref points, and we need to reward and incentivize those who have supported hunting for many decades and allow them to use/burn through their points and ACTUALLY hunt 1 or 2 of these species before they hit the dirt. Give MORE weight to higher point holders (perhaps cube points after say 15 points) and give NO chance to draw unless at least you have waited and applied for points for a min of 10 years. You have to wait that long to appreciate this hunt anyway I say. And, do not worry about simplification over what you proposed in this meeting. Montana, Ariz, Utah, Wyo, Oreg are much more complicated (esp Montana!). Last, average pref points for hunter groups for Deer, Elk and Pronghorn like Ariz and Wyo. This will help burn through point creep much faster and is why these states do this. And, again make the big three once-in-a-lifetime harvests (for Rams, Bulls and Billies). Thank you all for the hard work.

Regarding the recent Preference Point Workshop meeting, I feel the comment about hunter recruitment for the Big 3 is something that the ship has sailed on. While hunters as a % of the population has dropped, the demand for these tags has NEVER been higher. I believe we need to focus on the fact that there is real fear that many of us will outlive our pref points, and we need to reward and incentivize those who have supported hunting for many decades and allow them to use/burn through their points and ACTUALLY hunt 1 or 2 of these species before they hit the dirt. Give MORE weight to higher point holders (perhaps cube points after say 15 points) and give NO chance to draw unless at least you have waited and applied for points for a min of 10 years. You have to wait that long to appreciate this hunt anyway I say. And, do not worry about simplification over what you proposed in this meeting. Montana, Ariz, Utah, Wyo, Oreg are much more complicated (esp Montana!). Last, average pref points for hunter groups for Deer, Elk and Pronghorn like Ariz and Wyo. This will help burn through point creep much faster and is why these states do this. And, again make the big three once-in-a-lifetime harvests (for Rams, Bulls and Billies). Thank you all for the hard work.

- CPW MUST get rid of the option to "opt out" of purchasing a preference point if unsuccessful in the draw. Since the rule's inception, all high end hunt odds are significantly more watered down. Currently, one can buy the necessary 3 preference points to be in the lottery for drawing a moose, mt. goat and sheep tag and then continue to apply for the hunt with almost no financial investment. This watering down of the draw odds makes it extremely difficult or next to impossible for even the highest point holders to draw. If you look at the statistics in most hunt codes, a person with over 20-max points has minimal advantage over someone with 3 points. PLEASE consider getting rid of this allowance.
- I also believe the hybrid draw option is unfair to those who have built up the points necessary to get close to drawing a coveted high point hunt. It just creates more point creep and jammed up hunter applications.
- There should NOT be any form of random draws for tags that require a certain minimum number of pref. points.
- All Units/seasons must go to limited draw quotas for non residents (possibly residents as well). This will help ease the point discrepancies across the board. Consequently, allow a separate outfitter tag allocation or quota pool.
- Maybe revisiting point banking again as a means of flushing points out of the system. I know it was tried, but there has to be a successful alternative as opposed to the way it was implemented in the past.
- Lastly, no other states treats their resident hunters worse than Colorado... most other rocky mountain states provide significant advantages for their residents to hunt (roll-over licenses, extended seasons, better resident-to-non resident allocations, more opportunities for the hunter to be successful, etc.). Please consider prioritizing how to "take care of your own".

-You MUST get rid of the option to "opt out" of purchasing a preference point if unsuccessful in the draw. Since that rule's inception, all high end hunt odds are significantly more watered down. Currently, one can buy the necessary 3 preference points to be in the lottery for drawing a moose, mt. goat and sheep tag and then continue to apply for the hunt with almost no financial investment. This watering down of the draw odds makes it extremely difficult or next to impossible for even the highest point holders to draw. If you look at the statistics in most hunt codes, a person with over 20-max points has minimal advantage over someone with 3 points. PLEASE consider getting rid of this allowance.
- I also believe the hybrid draw option is unfair to those who have built up the points necessary to get close to drawing a coveted high point hunt. It just creates more point creep and jammed up hunter applications.
- There should NOT be any form of random draws for tags that require a certain minimum number of pref. points.
- All Units/seasons must go to limited draw quotas for non residents (possibly residents as well). This will help ease the point discrepancies across the board. Consequently, allow a separate outfitter tag allocation or quota pool.
- Maybe revisiting point banking again as a means of flushing points out of the system.
- Lastly, no other states treats their resident hunters worse than Colorado... most other rocky mountain states provide significant advantages for their residents to hunt (roll-over licenses, extended seasons, better resident-to-non resident allocations, more opportunities for the hunter to be successful, etc.). Please consider how to "take care of your own" as a priority.

-You MUST get rid of the option to "opt out" of purchasing a preference point if unsuccessful in the draw. Since that rule's inception, all high end hunt odds are significantly more watered down. Currently, one can buy the necessary 3 preference points to be in the lottery for drawing a moose, mt. goat and sheep tag and then continue to apply for the hunt with almost no financial investment. This watering down of the draw odds makes it extremely difficult or next to impossible for even the highest point holders to draw. If you look at the statistics in most hunt codes, a person with over 20-max points has minimal advantage over someone with 3 points. PLEASE consider getting rid of this allowance.
- I also believe the hybrid draw option is unfair to those who have built up the points necessary to get close to drawing a coveted high point hunt. It just creates more point creep and jammed up hunter applications.
- There should NOT be any form of random draws for tags that require a certain minimum number of pref. points.
- All Units/seasons must go to limited draw quotas for non residents (possibly residents as well). This will help ease the point discrepancies across the board. Consequently, allow a separate outfitter tag allocation or quota pool.
- Maybe revisiting point banking again as a means of flushing points out of the system.
- Lastly, no other states treats their resident hunters worse than Colorado... most other rocky mountain states provide significant advantages for their residents to hunt (roll-over licenses, extended seasons, better resident-to-non resident allocations, more opportunities for the hunter to be successful, etc.). Please consider how to "take care of your own" as a priority.

My comment below (and likely many others) has NOT been able to be entered for over a month now, while the functionality for being able to enter comments to the Draw Process Working Group has not been functional.

Given that a major objective of the Draw Process Working Group is to mitigate draw process complexities with a focus on simplification, then one of the focus items should be on simplifying the “spider web” of rules, regulations, preferences, opportunities, options etc, etc, related to Youth Hunting. Reading from top-to-bottom the Youth Hunting page 17 in the (2023) brochure leaves the reader with their “head spinning” trying to figure out how to fit something together, make it all work right and not make a mistake in doing so. Youth certainly deserve and should have preference but it shouldn’t be so hard to figure out. Right now it’s like trying to solve a Rubiks Cube.

My comment below (and likely many others) has NOT been able to be entered for over a month now, while the functionality for being able to enter comments to the Draw Process Working Group has not been functional.

Given that a major objective of the Draw Process Working Group is to mitigate draw process complexities with a focus on simplification, then one of the focus items should be on simplifying the “spider web” of rules, regulations, preferences, opportunities, options etc, etc, related to Youth Hunting. Reading from top-to-bottom the Youth Hunting page 17 in the (2023) brochure leaves the reader with their “head spinning” trying to figure out how to fit something together, make it all work right and not make a mistake in doing so. Youth certainly deserve and should have preference but it shouldn’t be so hard to figure out. Right now it’s like trying to solve a Rubiks Cube.

My comment below (and likely many others) has NOT been able to be entered for over a month now, while the functionality for being able to enter comments to the Draw Process Working Group has not been functional.

Given that a major objective of the Draw Process Working Group is to mitigate draw process complexities with a focus on simplification, then one of the focus items should be on simplifying the “spider web” of rules, regulations, preferences, opportunities, options etc, etc, related to Youth Hunting. Reading from top-to-bottom the Youth Hunting page 17 in the (2023) brochure leaves the reader with their “head spinning” trying to figure out how to fit something together, make it all work right and not make a mistake in doing so. Youth certainly deserve and should have preference but it shouldn’t be so hard to figure out. Right now it’s like trying to solve a Rubiks Cube.

Allow hunters that are 70 years old to purchase an elk and deer tag in the GMU of their choice without applying through the draw process. The draw is a lottery with limited success and seniors don’t have many more years to hunt. Wayne Timura

Eliminate PP only hunt codes. I feel too many people spend years buying them waiting for kids to graduate etc. You want a point apply for the tag. If you draw the tag it’s your choice to hunt or not. No turning it in to get your point back without paying for the tag. Raise the preference point fee similar to the big 3 tags.

DSRE testing 5

DSRE testing 5

My comment below (and likely many others) has been able to be entered for over a month now, while the functionality for being able to enter comments to the Draw Process Working Group has not been functional.
Given that a major objective of the Draw Process Working Group is to mitigate draw process complexities with a focus on simplification, then one of the focus items should be on simplifying the “spider web” of rules, regulations, preferences, opportunities, options etc, etc, related to Youth Hunting. Reading from top-to-bottom the Youth Hunting page 17 in the (2023) brochure leaves the reader with their “head spinning” trying to figure out how to fit something together, make it all work right and not make a mistake in doing so. Youth certainly deserve and should have preference but it shouldn’t be so hard to figure out. Right now it’s like trying to solve a Rubiks Cube.

test 3-DSRE