Draw Process Working Group

With the theme of trying to simplify the draw process, please look at and consider the "spider-web" of rules, exceptions, extensions, specialties, etc.etc. related to youth hunting. Anyone reading the entire Youth Hunting Page 17 in the (2023) brochure is left with their "head spinning"... Given all the "spider-web" of rules, exceptions, extensions, specialties, etc. and trying to make sense of it all and what to do, how to do it and how to avoid making a mistake with it all. Youth definitely deserve preference but can't we MAKE IT ALL EASY TO FIGURE OUT, UNDERSTAND AND USE without needing a "Dick Tracy Decoder Ring???

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has opportunity hunt OTC seasons with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits in those units. Hunting in crowded non-quality unit OTC units is neither successful nor enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often and reduce overall tags. The only way to do this is significantly reduce non-res tags. In some ways, I feel that CPW only has hunter-opportunity OTC seasons with an unlimited number of hunters just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded non-quality unit OTC units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, winter range habitat loses with an increasing population (Eagle Cty, Routt Cty) with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. Note it will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like eventually occurred in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

This is a comment for a small group of hunters, but a group that can be considered the most loyal to the point system and supporting CPW and that is the max or near max point holders for sheep, goat and moose. Two items: 1) By adding only one more weighted point per year of unsuccessful application it has become apparent with the ever-increasing popularity of these "big-three" these high point holders may not draw ever in their lifetime. To reward this loyalty while still making it possible for low-point holders to draw and as what most other states do for these species, we should square the points at each 1st choice application. Doing the math, this will increase the odds substantially of draw for these hunters. Also doing a quick statistical review, it is apparent that the mode, or highest range of point holders that draw, is those hunters in the greatest-sized group in that mid point range of say 8 to 14 pref points. The high 20-23 pt hunters almost never draw. This is not fair in many ways to the most loyal applicants with the highest points. 2) Make sheep and goat once in a lifetime draws as is with most other states. I know guys that have drawn 2 and 3 times in their life, while the vast majority have never drawn any of the "big three".

With Regards to tag creep reduction, I propose CPW to consider averaging preference points in a group application. such as what Wyo and Ariz do. While this will bring low-pref pt group members up somewhat, this also brings the highest point group member down. This will help burn through pref point banking/creep and is the #1 reason what these states use this method I am told. It will also prevent pushing the highest point non-group applicants out of the draw for top units and allow somewhat easier draws for those applicants.

I believe the system works fairly well, for the average hunter. Colorado does a good job of providing opportunity while balancing that opportunity against success for both deer and elk. I utilize the system as an "opportunity" type hunt, but am well aware that excellent trophy potential is high in any given year if one hunts hard (and has a bit of luck on their side). I also believe that Colorado has the fairest preference point party system - by restricting party applications to the "slowest runner" it keeps people from pooling points and getting an unfair leg up in the draws year after year (this is common in other states).

Where the system appears to frustrate hunters is with more limited opportunities; particularly with people that have stockpiled points and not gone hunting for many years. I certainly can appreciate their frustration, but, frankly, their failure to act and take advantage of opportunities to go hunting while "waiting out" premier units that are well known to be difficult to draw is no reason to turn the whole system on its head. It's unfortunate the the preference point system appears to improve your odds over time in very restricted or high demand units, but ultimately drawing odds comes down to tags issues divided by applicants. High point holders (particularly those a couple years off max points) should have recognized this a long time ago and altered their application strategy and drawn in many of the otherwise available, high quality units.

I believe the draw system here in Colorado works very well for low point units and should not be changed. I think a solution could be for tags requiring 5+ points, 50+% of the allocated tags should be random draw.

Eliminate OTC for all tags and point creep will be reduced.

Please don’t change the leftover list process as it’s an important way for residents to get tags to allow us to hunt every year, especially if we remove OTC tags. If anything I’d put a time delay or completely eliminate NR from that opportunity if any changes are made.

I think most residents would also be willing to increase our licensing costs to improve our odds of getting tags if CPW cannot properly function with a significantly reduced budget

I urge this group to consider the elimination of issuing new preference points from the deer and elk system. This would allow people that have invested over the past decades to use up their points that reflect their financial commitment, while also providing opportunity to new hunters in coming years as the point pool dwindles. It is frustrating to think that my son may never have the opportunity to hunt some of the unique opportunities our state has to offer because he couldn't start banking points 30 years ago (he's 6 months old now). Going forward PP holders could use their points as has been the case historically and when non-PP holders apply it could be a random draw much like New Mexico.

Solve the preference point creep by only allowing those who actually hunt big game here that year to earn a point.

eliminate otc for all = solve preference point issue