CPW Commission updating 80/20 allocation

[TOGIE]

I took the survey. The CBA has some good people in it and do some good work. But when I looked into joining a few years ago I realized pretty quickly after asking a few questions that they're very pro "status quo". For years they've stuck their heads in the sand and refused to acknowledge the growing overcrowding issues in OTC units. Now that the rumbling has turned into a roar and the commission itself is talking about limited draws they're trying to stall and come up with a more favorable outcome. Capping NR OTC isn't a bad idea although I far prefer OTC for residents and all limited for NR. Perhaps if CBA would've acknowledge the problem and got ahead of it they wouldn't be trying to figure out their stance at the last minute. From my understanding they still haven't announced any stance other then the old pro unlimited OTC.

they want to have their cake and eat it too.

they refuse to acknowledge that a lot of the crowding is also due to residents.

it's their stated mission that they are basically just a "protect and proliferate opportunity" organization. the health of our wildlife doesn't seem to be a part of that mission from what i can tell.

i'm not too ecstatic about them.

 

[COEngineer]

i'm not too ecstatic about them.

Understatement?

 

[TOGIE]

Understatement?

i just have a good time trolling them. trolling the average millennial aged colorado bowhunter is a bit of a pastime of mine.

in a more measured properly stated tone i'm just simply not a fan of CBA.

but i guess they live up to their mission, at least.

 

[BuzzH]

i just have a good time trolling them. trolling the average millennial aged colorado bowhunter is a bit of a pastime of mine.

in a more measured properly stated tone i'm just simply not a fan of CBA.

but i guess they live up to their mission, at least.

Don't feel alone, all bowhunter groups are the same. They live in denial that they impact the resource and screech like a scalded cat if you try to limit that impact.

A lot of the issues with harbored elk is directly due to bowhunting and bowhunters kill a lot of bulls.

Plus, they kill very few cows to help with herd reduction.

 

[TOGIE]

They live in denial that they impact the resource and screech like a scalded cat if you try to limit that impact.

there is literally no better descriptor of the CBA facebook discussion page than this right here ^

a relatively recent post:

"Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the Parks and Wildlife commission continued their nonstop assault, discrimination and disdain for otc Archery elk hunters today by limiting licenses only for Archery elk hunters on the grand mesa."

 

[WildWill]

The CBA has lost complete sight of the bigger picture sort of a "can't see the forest through the trees" situation.

 

[BuzzH]

The CBA has lost complete sight of the bigger picture sort of a "can't see the forest through the trees" situation.

All they can see is a bull elk through the peep sight...

 

[TOGIE]

All they can see is a bull elk through the peep sight...

i dunno, from the people i know who are members they mostly just literally see trees.

then they get home and complain about all the muzzleloader hunters ruining their hunts.

 

[sclancy27]

Don't feel alone, all bowhunter groups are the same. They live in denial that they impact the resource and screech like a scalded cat if you try to limit that impact.

A lot of the issues with harbored elk is directly due to bowhunting and bowhunters kill a lot of bulls.

Plus, they kill very few cows to help with herd reduction.

I guess it's not elk, but a good example of that is AZ OTC deer. The best units close in the first week of archery season cause they hit the archery take quota....

 

[Buffs35]

i dunno, from the people i know who are members they mostly just literally see trees.

then they get home and complain about all the muzzleloader hunters ruining their hunts.

 

[winmag]

Looks like CPW listened and updated the R/NR split for high demand tags. 80/20 based on a 3 year look back for tags that took 6 or more points. Also applied to pronghorn and bear. This will go into effect in 2023.

 

[Deleted member 52098]

Looks like CPW listened and updated the R/NR split for high demand tags. 80/20 based on a 3 year look back for tags that took 6 or more points. Also applied to pronghorn and bear. This will go into effect in 2023.View attachment 264643

Too bad it’s not 80/20 across the board. Womp womp

 

[winmag]

Apparently they’re still considering an across the board split of 75/25 and considering raising the high demand tags to 90/10.

 

[cedahm]

Apparently they’re still considering an across the board split of 75/25 and considering raising the high demand tags to 90/10.

Any intel on whether the Hybrid draw hunt codes will also expand to include the updated 3-year look back (versus the 2007-2009 draws they currently use)? As it’s not mentioned, I assume no, but they applied the same criteria for those tags.

 

[Oak]

Anyone care to explain how this is possible? 61 is a float unit for 2nd-4th.

 

[winmag]

Any intel on whether the Hybrid draw hunt codes will also expand to include the updated 3-year look back (versus the 2007-2009 draws they currently use)? As it’s not mentioned, I assume no, but they applied the same criteria for those tags.

That was specifically discussed in the preference point focus group meetings. Hopefully they’re still considering it because 2007-2009 is just stupid.

 

[winmag]

View attachment 264646

Anyone care to explain how this is possible? 61 is a float unit for 2nd-4th.

I don’t understand this either. I think they need to rethink their calculation.

 

[Oak]

I don’t understand this either. I think they need to rethink their calculation.

It's clear in the draw recap. Those three hunt codes are on one page and took a minimum of 10 R points to draw last year.

 

[winmag]

It's clear in the draw recap. Those three hunt codes are on one page and took a minimum of 10 R points to draw last year.

Someone needs to remind them how math works and that 10 > 6.

 

[Oak]

Someone not named Oak, tbh.