Colorado Draw Changes

[Sheltowee]

Can't have it both ways man. You want change? You need to make some sacrificial decisions as well. All of us do, R and NR.

I say take the persons money and points who turns in a tag, put the tag on the leftover list and force the second user to burn their points there on that tag as well (whatever points they have) Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

The guy that constantly turning in tags can't get tags anymore tags and the "other guy" loses his points and gets to go hunting. It's a win win for 99% of people.

This gets that high point holder out of the way so they do not draw those high point tags and turn them in again and again and again and again. Just like what has been happening for years. No offense.

Sure, no offense taken. Definitely a situation of reasonable minds can differ. I'm just not sure penalizing turn-ins serves the goal of increasing hunter opportunity, although it certainly could be an effective way of clearing out midlevel point-holders.

 

[Nick87]

The end result would be people holding onto tags they aren't able to hunt

Part of playing the game imo.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Sure, no offense taken. Definitely a situation of reasonable minds can differ. I'm just not sure penalizing turn-ins serves the goal of increasing hunter opportunity, although it certainly could be an effective way of clearing out midlevel point-holders.

Ya that's all I was getting at really and I meant that as respectfully as possible, not at a jab to you for tuning in a tag or being a R or NR. I could care less what group you or I are in. I just know that certain situations for turning in tags are far more dire than others. I get it. Life happens.

Bottom line: Turning in tags while retaining points increases point creep. We can all agree on that. Forcing people to burn points (in theory) should reduce point creep. So, with that mindset no tag should be going out the door and into someone pocket without some sort of "point tax"...

 

[Sheltowee]

Ya that's all I was getting at really and I meant that as respectfully as possible, not at a jab to you for tuning in a tag or being a R or NR. I could care less what group you or I are in. I just know that certain situations for turning in tags are far more dire than others. I get it. Life happens.

In the name of putting more elk on the mountain (or pronghorn on the prairie, or mule deer on some rock-choked hellhole), I wish CO would do a better job of opening private lands to public access. Seems like several other western states-- Montana and New Mexico-- do a much better job of opening access. Another way to clear out cached points would be to make those low/no point hunts more attractive to hunters.

 

[Mallardsx2]

In the name of putting more elk on the mountain (or pronghorn on the prairie, or mule deer on some rock-choked hellhole), I wish CO would do a better job of opening private lands to public access. Seems like several other western states-- Montana and New Mexico-- do a much better job of opening access. Another way to clear out cached points would be to make those low/no point hunts more attractive to hunters.

Meh, if the tags arnt attractive, they should just do away with the tags all together. I mean if the tags suck that bad, then why are they trying to even sell them? I see them doing this in deer units where the deer are struggling to survive but they keep letting people go out and pound the deer on B tags? Ya its mostly male only tags but still it just makes no sense to me but whatever.

Private access is something that a lot of other guys on here would know more about. I don't have much input on that because I can't afford to hunt there and the prices for that are only going higher.

 

[Sheltowee]

Meh, if the tags arnt attractive, they should just do away with the tags all together. I mean if the tags suck that bad, then why are they trying to even sell them? I see them doing this in deer units where the deer are struggling to survive but they keep letting people go out and pound the deer on B tags? Ya its mostly male only tags but still it just makes no sense to me but whatever.

Private access is something that a lot of other guys on here would know more about. I don't have much input on that because I can't afford to hunt there and the prices for that are only going higher.

The argument is the tags suck because most hunters, like you and I, can't get onto the private to hunt where the animals are piled up. There are plenty of animals in the units I'm thinking of, just very limited ways to get at them. In five days of third rifle for elk this year, saw 250ish head of elk camped around a center pivot on private and a grand total of one cow on public. Incentivizing private landowners to open access can make those tags a lot less sucky.

 

[Mallardsx2]

The argument is the tags suck because most hunters, like you and I, can't get onto the private to hunt where the animals are piled up. There are plenty of animals in the units I'm thinking of, just very limited ways to get at them. In five days of third rifle for elk this year, saw 250ish head of elk camped around a center pivot on private and a grand total of one cow on public. Incentivizing private landowners to open access can make those tags a lot less sucky.

Great point!

Another part of me says that those private lands (that the animals are hiding on) is the only reason that they are not completely wiped out but that's another topic for another day I guess.

 

[Qubo]

The brochure came today and right there printed on the cover in orange “Colorado doesn’t care about your residency as long as you’re rich”

I know these closures are for winter kill and I honestly am all for rolling back tags if the herd needs it. I’m just frustrated as someone who hunts that area on the public and keeps seeing how pay to play the system is going.

 

[Oak]

The brochure came today and right there printed on the cover in orange “Colorado doesn’t care about your residency as long as you’re rich”
View attachment 315708
I know these closures are for winter kill and I honestly am all for rolling back tags if the herd needs it. I’m just frustrated as someone who hunts that area on the public and keeps seeing how pay to play the system is going.

I understand your frustration about how this appears, but it really was simply an issue of timing and manpower. If those units had gone 100% limited for elk, then 20% of the licenses would have gone to the LPP. However, the change was not approved until the January Commission meeting, and the LLP registration deadline for 2024 was December 1, 2023. And all registrations submitted are audited and verified by the local DWM for compliance with eligibility requirements of the program before approval.

The necessary time was not available for CPW to implement LPP in these areas between the time the changes were approved by the Commission and the big game application deadline.

 

[Qubo]

I understand your frustration about how this appears, but it really was simply an issue of timing and manpower. If those units had gone 100% limited for elk, then 20% of the licenses would have gone to the LPP. However, the change was not approved until the January Commission meeting, and the LLP registration deadline for 2024 was December 1, 2023. And all registrations submitted are audited and verified by the local DWM for compliance with eligibility requirements of the program before approval.

The necessary time was not available for CPW to implement LPP in these areas between the time the changes were approved by the Commission and the big game application deadline.

Yeah I do get that and understand that's what they have to do per the draw rules. But even that just boils down to, "we don't have time to make sure landowners get preference over public land hunters". And I know the LPP program is there so landowners will keep habitat for the elk and I support that. It is just frustrating. I'm also just curious, since they are already considering limiting NR OTC in the state why didn't they say no NR otc in those units. I admit I don't know the statistics, so maybe it is better this way. It just makes me a little suspicious.

 

[TOGIE]

I admit I don't know the statistics, so maybe it is better this way.

which statistics?

 

[Mallardsx2]

I feel sorry for those guys in the units surrounding the flattops "OTC closure" areas. They are going to get trampled with OTC hunters this year during that 2nd and 3rd OTC elk seasons.

It's going to be a weird year for draws, and OTC rifle hunting around the flattops pressure will shift for sure. Units 15-22, brace yourselves.

 

[accubond]

I feel sorry for those guys in the units surrounding the flattops "OTC closure" areas. They are going to get trampled with OTC hunters this year during that 2nd and 3rd OTC elk seasons.

It's going to be a weird year or draws, and OTC rifle hunting around the flattops pressure will shift for sure. Units 15-22, brace yourselves.

I agree 100% and although I've enjoyed many OTC hunts in CO this is just another reason to do away with OTC, it worked until it didn't.

 

[Zim]

Well now I’m glad I burned my elk points in 2022 despite I got sick. Because with this change I’d have never drawn. I doubt this change will hurt my 28 lope points, but 15 deer points will definitely take a hit. But not unexpected as all the states routinely bait-n-switch these days.

 

[BuzzH]

Well now I’m glad I burned my elk points in 2022 despite I got sick. Because with this change I’d have never drawn. I doubt this change will hurt my 28 lope points, but 15 deer points will definitely take a hit. But not unexpected as all the states routinely bait-n-switch these days.

Here we go again....

 

[Ckleeves]

Well now I’m glad I burned my elk points in 2022 despite I got sick. Because with this change I’d have never drawn. I doubt this change will hurt my 28 lope points, but 15 deer points will definitely take a hit. But not unexpected as all the states routinely bait-n-switch these days.

No offense but 28 lope points is insane. You could have had about 8 good archery or 4 good rifle hunts by now. There isn’t an antelope unit in CO right now where there are a bunch of 80” bucks frolicking around no matter how many points it takes.

 

[Zim]

No offense but 28 lope points is insane. You could have had about 8 good archery or 4 good rifle hunts by now. There isn’t an antelope unit in CO right now where there are a bunch of 80” bucks frolicking around no matter how many points it takes.

Of course I’ve known that for years, but I saved them for a few reasons. First, the season dates never overlapped my other hunts well for combos. Plus I spread out preference point states as opposed to bonus, to be assured I could always have at least one hunt/year I knew I could draw. I don’t do this with most my apps. And thirdly, it’s a little insurance against the rampant bait-n-switching practices states like to do.

Randy also does this in at least one state, Iowa, where he has 10 or 11 points. Can draw any unit in the state with 5. I’m also sandbagging my 6 there due to having two slammer IL public spots I stumbled into recently. I’ll burn Iowa when too many Mississippi & Louisiana dudes find the IL properties, which is inevitable.

 

[Ckleeves]

^ Makes sense. I guess all I’m saying is it can be playing a dangerous game. Between winters, draw system and management changes I’m really trying to adapt a “burn em if you got em” mentality.

My wife dropped double the points required last year on a deer tag and I felt pretty silly punching in that hunt code knowing we could be on round #2 of that same hunt.

If CO continues down the same path we have been on with deer it’s a serious gut punch for guys who have built 20+ deer points. You could have had the same quality hunt with one/two points in 2005 as your getting with your 20 (non-res) points right now.

 

[Oak]

Solid public comment to the Commissioners:

"I'd like to know what is complex about this process? Complex is getting into a helicopter and flying across Afghanistan to shoot bin Laden in the face."

 

[ImBillT]

I’ve been hunting a unit that NR’s can draw with zero points every single year, and it still goes to the secondary draw. I guess residents needed even more tags that they don’t even want in the first place.

Honestly this didn’t need to be accross the board. They just needed to add units to the list that already gave residents a higher percentage of tags.

What extra sucks is that the secondary draw goes entirely to youth, and the locals that don’t want this tag, do want the tag for youths because a first season eaither sex tag rolls ever to a 2nd and 3rd season bull tag if a youth holds it, so they can add a week to their kid’s OTC season by picking this up in the secondary draw and still get their kid a point.