CPW Preference Point Banking Survey

[matpat]

Anyone else receive a point banking survey today from CPW via email?


“Colorado Parks and Wildlife would like your help with a survey we are conducting with high preference point holders in Colorado.

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission is considering implementing a preference point banking system for the future drawing of deer, elk, bear and pronghorn limited licenses. As a high preference point holder in Colorado, CPW would like to gauge your willingness and interest in using a preference point banking system to expend your accrued preference points.”

 

[rmanwill]

Yep. I received one also.

 

[fallguy]

Does a second survey come out for low point holders?

 

[khunter]

Wife has mega points deer and moose and 18 elk and pronghorn but did not receive survey

 

[Thill]

No but if I am surveyed I will vote for it. Even though it won't change my strategies for applying for tags.

 

[matpat]

I received it and have 15 pts for deer as a NR. Would like to get out of the point game and focus on units easier to draw. Seems like this may make those type units harder to draw in general.

 

[jims]

Makes low and mid tier unit pref pts point leap! Horrible idea!

 

[fallguy]

Anyone else receive a point banking survey today from CPW via email?


“Colorado Parks and Wildlife would like your help with a survey we are conducting with high preference point holders in Colorado.

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission is considering implementing a preference point banking system for the future drawing of deer, elk, bear and pronghorn limited licenses. As a high preference point holder in Colorado, CPW would like to gauge your willingness and interest in using a preference point banking system to expend your accrued preference points.”

I'm assuming questions about point banking options followed the above paragraph? If so, would you please copy and paste them? Thanks.

 

[matpat]

I tried to go back but the survey blocks repeat access once it is completed. They survey asked how many points for each species (deer, elk, antelope, etc) you have and then went on to ask your preference for point banking for each species (very favorable to not favorable at all). It explained you could partially use a portion of your points in a given year and keep the balance. If I recall, it would cost 2 points to do so.

 

[fallguy]

I tried to go back but the survey blocks repeat access once it is completed. They survey asked how many points for each species (deer, elk, antelope, etc) you have and then went on to ask your preference for point banking for each species (very favorable to not favorable at all). It explained you could partially use a portion of your points in a given year and keep the balance. If I recall, it would cost 2 points to do so.

OK, what am I missing here? Why would anyone with a bunch of points answer that they do not support this? Even if you don't plan to do it, you don't have to - you keep building points or keep trying to draw premier units.

 

[RRCowboyStar]

I am trying to understand why you are being rewarded for building points? You have been passing on opportunity to hunt the units you have enough points to draw, thinking more points equal a better hunt. If you want to hunt, burn your points and go hunt!

 

[matpat]

With 2 points currently for elk I’m opposed, but with 15 points for deer I’m for it ?. Im guessing CPW won’t let me have it both ways.

 

[FrontRange]

I think that whatever the survey results are the CPAW will approve point banking. $$ they can sell multiple tags to someone instead of a single tag. Revenue seems to be the driver in all their decisions.

 

[sticksender]

Got the survey. I'm opposed to banking, but they didn't ask any questions about that. They just wanted to know if I would use it. The general idea of point banking is to reduce the number of people hoarding points for high-demand dream tags that they are unlikely to ever draw. Problem is, this change would be at the expense of the more realistic folks who are actually going hunting, by repeatedly using a few points on lower-demand hunts, more often. It would most certainly guarantee that those folks will get to hunt their units less often.

Is it truly an improvement if it lets you get your high demand hunt in 86 years instead of 93? No, not really. It's pretty simple to me.....just keep the dreamers at home on their couch, building useless points. They're not harming anyone right now.

 

[fallguy]

I think that whatever the survey results are the CPAW will approve point banking. $$ they can sell multiple tags to someone instead of a single tag. Revenue seems to be the driver in all their decisions.

I don't think revenue is the issue on this one. A person can only have one List A tag and tags requiring points are going to sell out regardless of who is cashing in points on them.

At the March commission meeting, CPW staff recommended to not go the point banking route but to keep it as is. Commissioner Haskett (western CO outfitter) was the one who requested CPW staff gather more info on point banking which is no doubt why the recent survey went out.

Staff Recommendation - Preference Points (Banking and Group Averaging) Recommendation Maintain status quo (i.e., do not implement preference point banking or group averaging.

Rationales for Recommendation- Banking 1. Public comment form results 2. 2022 Big Game Attitudes Survey results 3. Increasing complexity of hunting regulations 4. Potential for point creep 5. Online system logistics.

 

[COLOelkman]

Makes low and mid tier unit pref pts point leap! Horrible idea!

Totally agree. Once you have a system, changing things will always effect some groups adversely while benefitting others. I'm in the lower point group now and could add several years to draw relatively low point tags if this gets approved.

 

[COLOelkman]

I don't think revenue is the issue on this one. A person can only have one List A tag and tags requiring points are going to sell out regardless of who is cashing in points on them.

At the March commission meeting, CPW staff recommended to not go the point banking route but to keep it as is. Commissioner Haskett (western CO outfitter) was the one who requested CPW staff gather more info on point banking which is no doubt why the recent survey went out.

Staff Recommendation - Preference Points (Banking and Group Averaging) Recommendation Maintain status quo (i.e., do not implement preference point banking or group averaging.

Rationales for Recommendation- Banking 1. Public comment form results 2. 2022 Big Game Attitudes Survey results 3. Increasing complexity of hunting regulations 4. Potential for point creep 5. Online system logistics.

I've read that summary also and a little confused as to why they still seem to have kept it on the table for further discussion and consideration?

 

[COLOelkman]

Once a system is in place, most people (myself included) seem to like or dislike it based on the impact to them. Whereas I think the question should be asked if it's "fair" to change it. As the saying goes, Life is not fair! so if point banking changes, it's not gonna be fair to either higher or lower point holders.

 

[fallguy]

I've read that summary also and a little confused as to why they still seem to have kept it on the table for further discussion and consideration?

Because Commissioner Haskett didn't like the CPW staff recommendation so she asked them to look into it further.

 

[gopher1]

yes sir I received it also, 20 some years of points

 

[MQQSE]

The Liberal low point holders are against it. The wealthy Conservative high point holders are for it. Maybe if the Lib point holders will get a free point or two when the Conservative point holders use their points then everyone will be for it.

 

[fallguy]

The Liberal low point holders are against it. The wealthy Conservative high point holders are for it. Maybe if the Lib point holders will get a free point or two when the Conservative point holders use their points then everyone will be for it.

Great idea, except low pt seniors get 3 pts.

 

[MrDoe]

It’s a great idea of you want to make it harder for new hunters and youth to get a decent tag and for hunting to die a slow death in Colorado.

 

[GLEDEASY]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in CO can't you gain a point and still hunt a second choice tag? If so, how many of these high point holders have been doing just that?

The idea of point banking makes absolutely zero sense to me. If someone wants to use their points to hunt x unit, just let them use all their points to do so. No one is forcing them to build and keep such points.

How many who are for point banking are against student loan forgiveness? Principles of the arguments seem similar to me ?‍

 

[Crampy]

Makes low and mid tier unit pref pts point leap!

Yes, it will.

But point banking gives those guys an exit ramp to the true preference point debacle that nobody truly foresaw back when they started collecting.

Almost all of those guys are staying home every year today - banking gets them back in a reasonable rotation of traveling to CO. And, they pay an extra 1-3 points to do it. So you are removing extra points from the broken system.

CO has to try something.

 

[RRCowboyStar]

Yes, it will.

But point banking gives those guys an exit ramp to the true preference point debacle that nobody truly foresaw back when they started collecting.

Almost all of those guys are staying home every year today - banking gets them back in a reasonable rotation of traveling to CO. And, they pay an extra 1-3 points to do it. So you are removing extra points from the broken system.

CO has to try something.

They have an exit ramp, they can use their points they have and come to Colorado and hunt. The choice to collect points and not hunt is their choice.
Those of us that choose to use our 1 or 2 points and hunt often should not have to step aside because others have made the choice to collect points rather than go hunting.
If they have their heart set on a dream unit they have to play the waiting game. Same system for everyone.

 

[street]

Yes, it will.

But point banking gives those guys an exit ramp to the true preference point debacle that nobody truly foresaw back when they started collecting.

Almost all of those guys are staying home every year today - banking gets them back in a reasonable rotation of traveling to CO. And, they pay an extra 1-3 points to do it. So you are removing extra points from the broken system.

CO has to try something.

We should feel sorry for people that stock piled a bunch of points they never used?

No CO doesn't have to try anything.

 

[nripepi]

They have an exit ramp, they can use their points they have and come to Colorado and hunt. The choice to collect points and not hunt is their choice.
Those of us that choose to use our 1 or 2 points and hunt often should not have to step aside because others have made the choice to collect points rather than go hunting.
If they have their heart set on a dream unit they have to play the waiting game. Same system for everyone.

The issue is their dream unit was decimated by CPW tag allocation and season structure. They waited and now their dream hunt is for a 150" deer. They want out, but are too invested to get out. Might as well just keep getting points hoping the hunting gets better. If they can pay the penalty and get two mediocre hunts instead of 1, I think they should allowed to because of CPW's recent tag allocation and season structure. I really doubt many will do this if the penalty is 3 points, just those that want to hunt and get two tags. I don't think it will change draw odds much at all if it is a 3 point penalty. I burned my Colorado points so it doesn't matter, but in Wyoming I am stuck with max points and 5% draw odds for the top units, just keep trying. I know I can get a lesser hunt for my points, but I am so close. if I could get two Region G tags I think I would point bank there.

 

[MrDoe]

Maybe we can just let the NR’s voting for it point bank and keep it how it is for the residents. If you’re hunting a high point unit in Colorado and can’t find a buck bigger than 150” you suck.

Colorado doesn’t have to do anything, they sell out all of the tags that take points every year.

 

[Crampy]

Same as always - everyone argues for the option that benefits them personally.

CPW knows the entire country is laughing at them and their four decade long inability to understand math. I suspect they are going to try Point Banking because they want to look like they are trying to address the mess they created.

 

[MrDoe]

Why do we need to remove top point holders? They pay fees every year for their huge stash of points and all of the tags still get sold (sometimes multiple times).

If NR’s keep pushing for stupid crap us residents are going to keep getting pissed and pushing for more and more of our piece of the ever shrinking pie.

 

[Crampy]

Because CPW hates CO residents. CPW prefers higher dollar tag fees and NR travel dollars and outfitting utilization.

CPW would much prefer to point bank me three deer tags at $456 than sell them to a resident three times @ $45.

If you don't think CPW hates their fellow residents, see your resident allocation debacle. And somehow 75/25 is considered a win for CO residents when 90/10 is the clear standard.

 

[BigChiefJ]

Why do we need to remove top point holders? They pay fees every year for their huge stash of points and all of the tags still get sold (sometimes multiple times).

If NR’s keep pushing for stupid crap us residents are going to keep getting pissed and pushing for more and more of our piece of the ever shrinking pie.

I don't think nonresident hunters have enough influence with CPW to get point banking for all hunters.

The initial survey results showed both residents and nonresidents were not in favor of any big changes made to the preference point system.

It appears that CPW decided to take it upon themselves to possibly allow point banking.

Mr. Fallguy posted this: Commissioner Haskett (western CO outfitter) was the one who requested CPW staff gather more info on point banking which is no doubt why the recent survey went out.

 

[HntHrdr]

I’m sitting on about 10 points for elk, antelope, I use my deer points too often, but it is a bad idea. It’s my choice to either burn or hunt 2nd choice or OTC, me getting to hunt a 2/3 point tag 3 times is jacked up and will only make those units jump like crazy

 

[Crampy]

I’m sitting on about 10 points for elk, antelope, I use my deer points too often, but it is a bad idea. It’s my choice to either burn or hunt 2nd choice or OTC, me getting to hunt a 2/3 point tag 3 times is jacked up and will only make those units jump like crazy

If PB was set up as +3, then you would be able to use 10 points to hunt a 2 point unit exactly twice. 2+3, plus 2+3. Twice.

 

[HntHrdr]

If PB was set up as +3, then you would be able to use 10 points to hunt a 2 point unit exactly twice. 2+3, plus 2+3. Twice.

I think from what was mentioned they settled on a 2 point penalty, true you get one extra tag, but shouldn’t do the banking thing seems like a bad idea that will just cause 0-3 point units to creep pretty quickly

 

[JakeH]

Maybe we can just let the NR’s voting for it point bank and keep it how it is for the residents. If you’re hunting a high point unit in Colorado and can’t find a buck bigger than 150” you suck.

Colorado doesn’t have to do anything, they sell out all of the tags that take points every year.

Hey now, stop lumping all us NR together. And I agree if you can't find a buck better than 150 you are doing something wrong.

 

[JakeH]

Because CPW hates CO residents. CPW prefers higher dollar tag fees and NR travel dollars and outfitting utilization.

CPW would much prefer to point bank me three deer tags at $456 than sell them to a resident three times @ $45..

They are selling all those tags either way so why would it matter if you get 3 tags or 3 different guys get 1 tag? And they are not going to sell you 3 tags that a resident would get, they have caps your argument makes no sense.

 

[MrDoe]

Hey now, stop lumping all us NR together. And I agree if you can't find a buck better than 150 you are doing something wrong.

No offense to you Jake, just gets tiresome with the guys feeling entitled to a 190” buck from their side by side because they’ve sat on the sideline for 2 decades, then get mad when my kids draw tags in the secondary draw because they really wanted those tags (but not if it cost them their points). They finally realize they should’ve hunted 10 times already so they want to take a few opportunities away from people that have prioritized hunting every year (versus hoarding points for their side by side rut hunt). Then…. finally blow their points and shoot a 150” 4 pt that doesn’t meet their expectations because they definitely can’t eat tag soup. And finally… come on the internet and talk about how terrible Colorado is and there’s no big bucks in the top end units because they didn’t shoot a 190” from their side by side.

 

[MrDoe]

We are trying to solve a problem that doesn’t need solved… why do we care if there’s a bunch of top point holders spending money every year for another point?

 

[Ridn9high]

They are the ones who decided to hold on to their points and not use them for 10,15,20 years. They could have used them any year, just like the rest of us have. If they have 20 points and want to hunt a 12 point unit, they should have to use all their points. Some things don’t need changed.

 

[Founder]

The problem with letting things go status quo is that low point holders and new, young hunters, will never get to hunt the best hunts. I was looking at the 44 3rd and 4th numbers and there are so many high point holders in line. My son would never catch up to ever do one of those hunts.

The point banking would at least get some of the high point holders out of line for the best hunts and maybe give young people a chance to experience a top trophy opportunity hunt in their lifetime.

Maybe even with point banking those top trophy hunts are just too far out of reach for anyone new to the game. ????

 

[sticksender]

Point banking was tried about 10-12 years back for a test to see what people would do and there was found to be very little of the desired effect, so it was abandoned. The people who want to hoard points will keep doing it if we just leave them alone. For a lot of high demand hunts, they will continue to have a chance in the Hybrid Draw, with 20% of those tags being awarded at random to residents. Those may be better odds than they'll have at living long enough to draw the hunt by preference.

Another issue is that every year there are thousands of people who are choosing to burn way more points than required to draw low-point units, which in itself is already reducing the total points in the pool. You can see that happening, by glancing through the Draw Recaps every year. Under banking, those same people would be allowed to keep some of their points. With regard to that effect, banking is counter-productive to it's intended purpose.

 

[nripepi]

They are the ones who decided to hold on to their points and not use them for 10,15,20 years. They could have used them any year, just like the rest of us have. If they have 20 points and want to hunt a 12 point unit, they should have to use all their points. Some things don’t need changed.

The issue is to me that the quality has tanked because of CPW management decisions so those people got screwed and have no choice but to hang on and hope things get better. If CPW wants to continue killing all of the big bucks and giving too many tags to sustain quality, then I think point banking is fair to those who have waited for a primo tag.

Just look at the other thread going and the results from the last two years in the two best units in the Gunnison where 10+ people and no one saw a 170-inch buck and said it is a 150-160 inch hunt.
66 and 67 3rd results

They might as well hunt an 8-point unit twice based on those results and it seems fair to me. It will also get a few out of the point race to hopefully help those who want to wait for things to change. r

 

[Ridn9high]

I feel like the only way a new hunter would ever have a chance at a top tier unit, is if Colorado had some random tags for each hunt code. There are too many high point holders and doing point banking or averaging wouldn’t knock enough of them out to make a difference.

 

[RRCowboyStar]

The issue is to me that the quality has tanked because of CPW management decisions so those people got screwed and have no choice but to hang on and hope things get better. If CPW wants to continue killing all of the big bucks and giving too many tags to sustain quality, then I think point banking is fair to those who have waited for a primo tag.

Just look at the other thread going and the results from the last two years in the two best units in the Gunnison where 10+ people and no one saw a 170-inch buck and said it is a 150-160 inch hunt.
66 and 67 3rd results

They might as well hunt an 8-point unit twice based on those results and it seems fair to me. It will also get a few out of the point race to hopefully help those who want to wait for things to change. r

They are free to hunt an 8 point unit now. They should not be rewarded with extra hunts. Blaming CPW for lack of quality is not an excuse to get bonus tags.
If the "Dream Unit" does not offer you what you desire, than the "Lower Tier" units will leave you even more disappointed.
The best way to get the high point holder out of the game is to take your points when you hunt, whether it is a Landowner tag, 2nd choice or a leftover/reissue tag.
If the start to offer random draw tags for your "Dream Units" then you will piss off the high point holders that have been waiting in line.
Just to much demand for limited tags.

 

[Founder]

I feel like the only way a new hunter would ever have a chance at a top tier unit, is if Colorado had some random tags for each hunt code. There are too many high point holders and doing point banking or averaging wouldn’t knock enough of them out to make a difference.

That hybrid thing offers that on some hunts. I think that's a good thing.

 

[Founder]

They are free to hunt an 8 point unit now. They should not be rewarded with extra hunts. Blaming CPW for lack of quality is not an excuse to get bonus tags.
If the "Dream Unit" does not offer you what you desire, than the "Lower Tier" units will leave you even more disappointed.
The best way to get the high point holder out of the game is to take your points when you hunt, whether it is a Landowner tag, 2nd choice or a leftover/reissue tag.
If the start to offer random draw tags for your "Dream Units" then you will piss off the high point holders that have been waiting in line.
Just to much demand for limited tags.

It would be interesting to see how many high point holders have been getting landowner or reissue tags for years. I would guess it's not a lot of them, but definitely some, because I'm one of them.

Taking points for the use of any tag, regardless how it's acquired, would definitely remove a few high point guys from the waiting line for those top trophy hunts.

The random draw tags (hybrid draw) I think is a good thing, but it does come at a cost to those who've been waiting in line for many years for those tags.

If the point banking were to ever be a thing again, I really don't know what I'd do. ????

 

[rmanwill]

I am against point banking. The one year a dozen years ago I did benefit from banking when they tried it. I did not intend to, just worked out that when I was ready to hunt and had time and a unit I wanted it was that year. I put in and did maintained several points that helped me hunt that same unit a second time in a shorter time frame.

I do have HIGH points for elk and no way would try to bank/use them to hunt a lesser unit twice. The only people I believe that would use bank points is (mid level point holders). Them that are to far down for the top units but enough points to get a second hunt sooner.

This would only hurt the lower point unit draw odds.

In defense of people with high points, not all have missed out on hunting or saved more points not knowing it. People purchase points each year for the opportunity when they are ready to hunt. Time off work, retirement, the right year when a partner can go with or the right year where thing align. One case is my Utah bear points. I could have drawn for the past 10 years, but hunt Idaho bear with 90-100 percent success. I just buy the point every year so when I wish to hunt I will have plenty of points and at this point I can draw the multi season tag in one of the top units or split my points with my wife or one of my sons and draw the early bait/rifle tag. A big WIN when that was not the intent.

I have had the points to draw tags in several states in the past, but I did not use them the first year I could have.

I have not missed out on hunting by building points. It is that as a working family man I could only hunt so many hunts in a couple different states in a given year. Some years I have even hunted possible a hunt or two more then I should have. I try to give it my all and really enjoy my time when I draw and not just hit several hunts for the first couple days and fly to the next hunt a day or two later. I enjoy knowing I have numerous good hunts my wife, son's or myself can draw for the next dozen years at my choosing.

 

[JakeH]

The problem with letting things go status quo is that low point holders and new, young hunters, will never get to hunt the best hunts. I was looking at the 44 3rd and 4th numbers and there are so many high point holders in line. My son would never catch up to ever do one of those hunts.

The point banking would at least get some of the high point holders out of line for the best hunts and maybe give young people a chance to experience a top trophy opportunity hunt in their lifetime.

Maybe even with point banking those top trophy hunts are just too far out of reach for anyone new to the game. ????

Those hunts are not going to be in his future regardless, not enough people will use the banking to effect the tip end units, but I bet enough of them do to really have an impact on the lower tier units in a negative way.

If your son really wants to hunt Colorado with any consistency then point banking will have a negative effect on that.

The only thing they could do at this point for top end units for new hunters is offer a % of tags to a random draw like utah does. Which, in all honesty is probably the most fair thing to do. And they should do it for all units for both residents and non residents.

As long as there is a point system there will never not be super high points needed for the best tags, at least not until it gets so high that a majority of dudes are dieing out of old age each year.

Point Banking will only prolong the misery for everyone else by extending the lower point units into mid point units.

 

[JakeH]

The issue is to me that the quality has tanked because of CPW management decisions so those people got screwed and have no choice but to hang on and hope things get better. If CPW wants to continue killing all of the big bucks and giving too many tags to sustain quality, then I think point banking is fair to those who have waited for a primo tag.

Just look at the other thread going and the results from the last two years in the two best units in the Gunnison where 10+ people and no one saw a 170-inch buck and said it is a 150-160 inch hunt.
66 and 67 3rd results

They might as well hunt an 8-point unit twice based on those results and it seems fair to me. It will also get a few out of the point race to hopefully help those who want to wait for things to change. r

You keep saying these guys are getting screwed by CPW, cpw does not owe those guys anything except a deer tag when they decide to use their points beyond that they owe them nothing, not a quality experience, guaranteed size of buck, or a number of deer seen during the hunt. This is not like buying a guided hunt.

The fact people didn't read the writing on the walls the last few years is completely on them. cpw has not been shy about their motive to reduce the older age class of deer. And now this winter is going to make things even worse.

So the guys with a bunch of points has two options, use them now, or wait and see.

 

[Crampy]

The random draw tags (hybrid draw) I think is a good thing, but it does come at a cost to those who've been waiting in line for many years for those tags.

CPW Hydrid draw doesn't apply to you as an NR.

The regular draw is done first and the NR cap is almost always met in the regular draw before the hybrid draw occurs. So an NR virtually never gets a random/hybrid tag for DEP.

Does CPW disclose this so you don't waste your time? No.

 

[HntHrdr]

The problem with letting things go status quo is that low point holders and new, young hunters, will never get to hunt the best hunts. I was looking at the 44 3rd and 4th numbers and there are so many high point holders in line. My son would never catch up to ever do one of those hunts.

The point banking would at least get some of the high point holders out of line for the best hunts and maybe give young people a chance to experience a top trophy opportunity hunt in their lifetime.

Maybe even with point banking those top trophy hunts are just too far out of reach for anyone new to the game. ????

Founder, I think they are out of reach, except for hybrid

You keep saying these guys are getting screwed by CPW, cpw does not owe those guys anything except a deer tag when they decide to use their points beyond that they owe them nothing, not a quality experience, guaranteed size of buck, or a number of deer seen during the hunt. This is not like buying a guided hunt.

The fact people didn't read the writing on the walls the last few years is completely on them. cpw has not been shy about their motive to reduce the older age class of deer. And now this winter is going to make things even worse.

So the guys with a bunch of points has two options, use them now, or wait and see.

cpw hasn’t screwed higher point holders, it has screwed all hunters by managing for dollars and not for herd health…

 

[MQQSE]

Just bought my 21st elk and lope points. Not sure when I’ll get to use them as other hunts always get in the way before it’s time to apply in Colorado. Have several units and seasons in mind.

I’d like to have the option to save some points as I’ll likely have way more than necessary when I burn these.

 

[Thill]

Point banking was tried about 10-12 years back for a test to see what people would do and there was found o be very little of the desired effect, so it was abandoned.

At the focus meetings last year, someone from CPW mentioned they didn't give enough time to see how it played out due to the number of complaints and the misunderstandings of how it worked.

I would think it would take a couple of years to see how it plays out.

Think about the changes we already have on the slate for this year. R/NR ratio changes.
NR cow tags the same price as bulls.
Winterkill tag decreases for various units.
Wolves
These are few that are popping into my head.

These items will definitely impact preference points.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Point banking was tried about 10-12 years back for a test to see what people would do and there was found to be very little of the desired effect, so it was abandoned. The people who want to hoard points will keep doing it if we just leave them alone. For a lot of high demand hunts, they will continue to have a chance in the Hybrid Draw, with 20% of those tags being awarded at random to residents. Those may be better odds than they'll have at living long enough to draw the hunt by preference.

Another issue is that every year there are thousands of people who are choosing to burn way more points than required to draw low-point units, which in itself is already reducing the total points in the pool. You can see that happening, by glancing through the Draw Recaps every year. Under banking, those same people would be allowed to keep some of their points. With regard to that effect, banking is counter-productive to it's intended purpose.

They only did it for one year not really long enough to see if it had any effect.

 

[BigChiefJ]

I looked at my old Big Game Brochures and they only tried point banking in 2006. I wish they would allow it for the next 5-year season structure.

Looking at some other social media outlets some folks think a person with 20 points could hunt a 2 point unit 10 times. Others were saying CPW should have had a comment period about point banking. It's kind of fun to read.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

The math is hard for a lot of people

 

[Bookhead]

With point banking you could more or less average all of the points out there and that's what the lowest areas would require. Absolutely horrible idea that only benefit the people that sat on their hands instead of hunting when they had the chance. It will not help the top tier units they will always require max points

 

[nripepi]

Absolutely horrible idea that only benefit the people that sat on their hands instead of hunting when they had the chance. I

What if this lazy person applied three times and didn't draw because points jumped 2+ points from what they were the previous year?

 

[nripepi]

You keep saying these guys are getting screwed by CPW, cpw does not owe those guys anything except a deer tag when they decide to use their points beyond that they owe them nothing, not a quality experience, guaranteed size of buck, or a number of deer seen during the hunt. This is not like buying a guided hunt.

The fact people didn't read the writing on the walls the last few years is completely on them. cpw has not been shy about their motive to reduce the older age class of deer. And now this winter is going to make things even worse.

So the guys with a bunch of points has two options, use them now, or wait and see.

They are getting screwed, they bought 20 years of points, and many of them tried to burn those points multiple times and point creep got them. This was more intense the last few years and it got a lot of people. Go look at the stats and see how many people were one below what units ended up taking to draw, but were two to three or four+ more than what they had been taking. They tried to draw with a good buffer and failed and the deer are decimated in the Gunnison and other units because of the late seasons and too many tags. They are stuck sitting on the points now because the units they can draw are not "worth" 20 points and they should just wait and hope things get better while those that were lucky enough to get out can draw lower point tags if they want to. Most of these people would not use point banking and will just wait or go hunt 66/67 3rd and shoot a 150" deer or eat tag soup. That is all fine and dandy, but I think because of CPW's drastic change in management those that would want to should be able to point bank and go hunt 150" deer on an overcrowded 8-point unit twice for their once in a lifetime 20-point tag. I am only in favor of this if there is a 3-point penalty.

 

[BigChiefJ]

I think most of us with a lot of points accumulated them while also hunting. I've taken advantage of OTC, second to fourth choice draws, bought leftover tags, and tried to buy a coveted returned tag or two.

This is probably the main reason why there's a lot of high point holders.

If I could get a refund for all my points, I would like a true random draw. That would make drawing day way more exciting!

 

[Bookhead]

What if this lazy person applied three times and didn't draw because points jumped 2+ points from what they were the previous year?

Hunt a different area. Novel idea

 

[jims]

There are several things the cpw could do to truly lower pt creep.

1). Eliminate otc and go to all draw for elk. Every 1st choice elk tag drawn in every unit across Colo would burn pts.

2). Require those that purchase landowner tags to burn all their pts.

3). Require hunters for all tags to front the $ to apply.

4). Don’t revert to pt banking!

5). Forget about pt banking!

6). No pt banking!

 

[jims]

Another option I didn’t list is to require 2nd draw to burn all their pts. This would benefit those that actually want to hunt on a fairly regular basis.

Oh yah, no pt banking! I have 16 to 24 pts for elk, antelope, and bear. Even though pt banking would favor me I strongly believe the majority of hunters are screwed by pt banking. Pref pts would leap in low to mid tier units.

 

[nripepi]

Hunt a different area. Novel idea

What if they applied for 4 different areas?

 

[Triple7]

There are several things the cpw could do to truly lower pt creep.

1). Eliminate otc and go to all draw for elk. Every 1st choice elk tag drawn in every unit across Colo would burn pts.

2). Require those that purchase landowner tags to burn all their pts.

3). Require hunters for all tags to front the $ to apply.

4). Don’t revert to pt banking!

5). Forget about pt banking!

6). No pt banking!

I agree with this. Makes a lot of sense, landowner tags and reissue tags should use all pref points. I’ve used both and saved points for later draw tags but really not fair to guys that can’t purchase a voucher or get lucky for a reissue tag. Re issue tags are pretty much a lottery now but IMO should reset your points balance to 0 if your luck enough to get one.Would make a lot of guys rethink befor playing that game. And point banking will just add to point creep in the middle tier applicants especially for the non-res.

 

[MrDoe]

The math is hard for a lot of people

Can you explain this please? If you’re the same Orion from bowsite math definitely isn’t your strong suit.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Can you explain this please? If you’re the same Orion from bowsite math definitely isn’t your strong suit.

There will be a three point penalty so a guy with 20 points can't hunt a 2 point unit ten times like was previously stated. You must be one of those delusional bowsiters that think weighted points matter for sheep, goat, and moose

 

[MrDoe]

There will be a three point penalty so a guy with 20 points can't hunt a 2 point unit ten times like was previously stated. You must be one of those delusional bowsiters that think weighted points matter for sheep, goat, and moose

Haha it is you.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Haha it is you.

Haha you are that delusional bowsiter

 

[yotebuster17]

So here’s an odd question, how do they know how many points it took? Like if a guy puts in for a unit that took 5 points last year with 25 and there’s a few with 20, some with 10 etc all the way down to 5. How many points do they take from each of those guys?? Obviously the addition of those guys is gonna cause major point creep but then they aren’t taking all of their points. I’m not understanding

 

[MrDoe]

Haha you are that delusional bowsiter

Yep one of those dumb guys that literally gets paid to do math.

 

[Triple7]

There will be a three point penalty so a guy with 20 points can't hunt a 2 point unit ten times like was previously stated. You must be one of those delusional bowsiters that think weighted points matter for sheep, goat, and moose

Wouldn’t he be able to hunt it four times. 2 points to draw it each time + 3 point penalty each time = 5 x 4= 20 ??

 

[BigChiefJ]

So here’s an odd question, how do they know how many points it took? Like if a guy puts in for a unit that took 5 points last year with 25 and there’s a few with 20, some with 10 etc all the way down to 5. How many points do they take from each of those guys?? Obviously the addition of those guys is gonna cause major point creep but then they aren’t taking all of their points. I’m not understanding

The would run the draw normally until they run out of tags with the lowest point holders. The computer would charge the required number of points plus any extra as applicable.

Basically for a hunt that takes 5 PPs to draw, any drawn with 5 to 8 points will have their PPs reset to zero. Any with 9 or more points will have 8 points taken from their total.

Hopefully that's clear as mud.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Wouldn’t he be able to hunt it four times. 2 points to draw it each time + 3 point penalty each time = 5 x 4= 20 ??

Yes but the post said they would hunt it ten times which couldn't happen. I also doubt someone with 20 points wants to hunt a 2 point unit. Most would probably hunt 6 or 7 point units twice or hunt a 10-15 point unit and keep their remaining points

 

[Thill]

Since we are all having so much fun talking about Point
Banking, maybe we should start talking politics!

 

[sticksender]

According to the survey, they're proposing a 2 point penalty, not 3. And if they use what they refer to as "Final Level" (see the "Drawn Out" reports on CPW website) as the baseline minimum points, which they probably will, then it's really only a 1-point penalty. Because "Final Level" is one point less than the minimum points required to guarantee draw.

 

[MrDoe]

There are about 90,000 residents with 0-3 deer points. There are around 900 with 20+. We can’t screw 90,000 people to appease 900. I agree something will need to change but point banking isn’t it. Straight random or bonus points instead of preference points are in the future at some point.

 

[Bluehair]

So here’s an odd question, how do they know how many points it took? Like if a guy puts in for a unit that took 5 points last year with 25 and there’s a few with 20, some with 10 etc all the way down to 5. How many points do they take from each of those guys?? Obviously the addition of those guys is gonna cause major point creep but then they aren’t taking all of their points. I’m not understanding

Well, this seems like an ideal opportunity for CPW to charge another fee - a Weighted Banked Point. $8 gets you the lower number.

 

[BigChiefJ]

According to the survey, they're proposing a 2 point penalty, not 3. And if they use what they refer to as "Final Level" (see the "Drawn Out" reports on CPW website) as the baseline minimum points, which they probably will, then it's really only a 1-point penalty. Because "Final Level" is one point less than the minimum points required to guarantee draw.

I already did the math with a 3 point penalty. Now I have to start over and recalculate everything with 2 extra points.

I think a 3-4 point penalty would be better than 2.

What's next, a 1 and 33/64ths point penalty?

 

[COLOelkman]

I feel like the only way a new hunter would ever have a chance at a top tier unit, is if Colorado had some random tags for each hunt code. There are too many high point holders and doing point banking or averaging wouldn’t knock enough of them out to make a difference.

They do....sort of. It's called the hybrid draw where you can draw a top tier unit. If you have 5 pts. or more you can apply for those specific units. Must be your 1st choice.

 

[COLOelkman]

So here’s an odd question, how do they know how many points it took? Like if a guy puts in for a unit that took 5 points last year with 25 and there’s a few with 20, some with 10 etc all the way down to 5. How many points do they take from each of those guys?? Obviously the addition of those guys is gonna cause major point creep but then they aren’t taking all of their points. I’m not understanding

Here's my guess, If a unit has 15 tags, they'd take the top 15 applicants, then the applicant with the lowest points becomes the baseline for which they'd take that many points from everyone plus whatever penalty points is established.

 

[diablo]

They do....sort of. It's called the hybrid draw where you can draw a top tier unit. If you have 5 pts. or more you can apply for those specific units. Must be your 1st choice.

Maybe someone can explain this. According to the Epic Outdoors guys, the nonres cap is always met on those hybrid draw units before the hybrid draw is conducted so nonresidents effectively have zero chance to draw.

From the emag:

 

[sticksender]

Maybe someone can explain this. According to the Epic Outdoors guys, the nonres cap is always met on those hybrid draw units before the hybrid draw is conducted so nonresidents effectively have zero chance to draw.

From the emag:

View attachment 107140

I believe they just did explain it. No non-resident has ever drawn a Hybrid tag for deer or elk, for the reason they spelled out. So their statement is correct, except I would replace the word "usually" with "always".

Their statement did not apply to Pronghorn though, since prior to 2023 there was no NR ceiling on pronghorn hunt codes. However, that was remedied for 2023 and onwards, as NR caps now apply to that species as well.

 

[diablo]

I understand that there are two draws (regular and hybrid) in the primary draw for hybrid units and the result but I’ve never seen anyone, including CPW, explain exactly how that process works.

 

[Ridn9high]

They do....sort of. It's called the hybrid draw where you can draw a top tier unit. If you have 5 pts. or more you can apply for those specific units. Must be your 1st choice.

I know about the hybrid, but that doesn’t help NR in anyway, let alone a youth hunter. So even if a resident youth has to have 5 points to be entered into the hybrid, they’re really not much of a youth at that time anymore at 17/18 years old.

 

[Crampy]

I understand that there are two draws (regular and hybrid) in the primary draw for hybrid units and the result but I’ve never seen anyone, including CPW, explain exactly how that process works.

CPW doesn't want you to understand the NR Hybrid problem. They want you to waste time picking through these hunt codes and making you feel as though you have a chance. When you don't.

This is 100% analogous to the AZ 1/2 pass before the 5/5 split fix in 2016. The NR cap was met in the 1/2 pass and no NR really had a random chance in the random. AZGFD never told anyone that - and probably didn't understand it themselves. It took the data geeks looking over the reports to flesh out the problem and push for a fix.

 

[diablo]

 

[Joe2Kool]

10 deer points and 4 elk points. Didn't get a survey.

If it is in this thread, I missed it, but exactly what is Point Banking?

 

[diablo]

10 deer points and 4 elk points. Didn't get a survey.

If it is in this thread, I missed it, but exactly what is Point Banking?

^^ it’s in this thread^^

 

[Joe2Kool]

^^ it’s in this thread^^

Well after reading about 50 of the 90 responses in this thread, with lots of them going on about how it would help or hurt different point holders, and then it went into the AZ and UT draw systems, I kinda got tired of reading. So I guess you can say I got lazy and was hoping someone would dumb it down for me.

But, thanks for your help!

 

[rmanwill]

Here you go Joe2Kool

Point banking = person with 10 points draws a tag in unit that gave tags dropping into the 6 point pool group.

6 points used to draw from lowest point pool group plus (2 points or whatever number they decide on) for the banking bonus/penalty.

6+2=8 points used. Applicant banked/left with 2 points.

 

[Joe2Kool]

Got it Rman! Thanks.

Hmmm. The current system generally keeps the 20 point holder from hunting a 5 point unit.
But the PB system allows the 20 point holder to keep drawing 5 point tags a few years.
IDK. Rewards and gives flexibility to those who have played the game a long time, but keeps those new to the game from drawing for a longer time. I can see both arguments.

 

[HntHrdr]

Got it Rman! Thanks.

Hmmm. The current system generally keeps the 20 point holder from hunting a 5 point unit.
But the PB system allows the 20 point holder to keep drawing 5 point tags a few years.
IDK. Rewards and gives flexibility to those who have played the game a long time, but keeps those new to the game from drawing for a longer time. I can see both arguments.

Spot on… but there is also the element of the unknowns, I think there is a lot of assumption that guys who have been waiting 20+ years will start cashing in on lesser units… I tend to think if you have the willpower to hold out that long you probably won’t quit now, but who knows?

 

[Thill]

Not that I am in this position, but if I had 20+ points you should be able to math to see if you still have a decent probability and when you can be a position to get the desired tag based on the current number of applicants with your points or greater that have been applying.

Again you can only base this logic on the same number tags and continued applicants with the same or greater number of preference points. I would not factor in winterkill or R/NR changes until the situation is clarified.

I know of 2 residents that are in the 20+ points that have realized they would be approximately 70+ years old before they would be in the hunt for the desired tag. Both now are trying to figure out Plan B.

 

[Triple7]

I do think if point banking is accepted next year it won’t solve the issues. Some will use it but I bet a lot more keep gaining points. I can see CPW in the future going completely random and making everyone use their current preference points that year as bonus points for better draw odds. After that year no more points just random.

 

[jims]

How many guys with 10 to 20+ pts will point bank and draw multiple tags? No one really knows but my guess is that guys with around say 10 to 18 pts will likely see the writing on the wall that they will never catch up to draw the premier units even with pt banking.

Every additional tag drawn by those with 10 to 18 pts with pt banking is one less tag available for those with 0 to 10 pts to draw. You can only imagine how tough it would then be to draw units that take 1 to 10 pts. The 1 to 10 pt units are those that impact the highest overall number of applicants.

With that said, not only will units that take close to max pts still be tough to draw but those with 5 to 10 will suddenly be a chunk tougher to draw.

Point banking is a horrible idea!