Colorado Fake Tag Caps??

[ElDiablito]

When was the election? I never got a ballot to vote on it.

Let’s use the words “nominated and chosen” (although I’m not sure how they were selected) for the Draw Process Working Group.

That group unanimously recommended this change.

Then CPW argued against it for financial reasons.

 

[svivian]

It's not reasonable for R to prop up a petition saying "there's no hard cap!", when they are refusing to utilize the hard cap in place.

What is the reason why those people choose not to do so? Very simple question that you both are choosing not to answer.

I answered that question post 49. Which proves my point that you aren’t taking the time to read.

Have a good day Kyle

 

[sndmn11]

Let’s use the words “nominated and chosen” (although I’m not sure how they were selected) for the Draw Process Working Group.

That group unanimously recommended this change.

Then CPW argued against it for financial reasons.

There ya go! So random folks who are not the experts employed by CPW.

Then CPW, the hired professionals "we" all said should make wildlife decisions, had a separate recommendation to maintain status quo.

Same questions as before:
1) are the hired professionals at CPW suddenly inept?
2) What is preventing R from applying for these hunt codes with their 1st choice?

 

[ElDiablito]

There ya go! So random folks who are not the experts employed by CPW.

Then CPW, the hired professionals "we" all said should make wildlife decisions, had a separate recommendation to maintain status quo.

Same questions as before:
1) are the hired professionals at CPW suddenly inept?
2) What is preventing R from applying for these hunt codes with their 1st choice?

Go back and read post #95

 

[cnelk]

As far Point Creep.

This is a Hunter Issue, not a CPW Issue. The CPW has recognized there is Point Creep but intends to do nothing about it.

 

[sndmn11]

Go back and read post #95

I read it, my questions remain unanswered by you guys asking for petition support.

CPW recommended status quo, are they no longer the experts "we" said they were last month?

 

[svivian]

I read it, my questions remain unanswered by you guys asking for petition support.

CPW recommended status quo, are they no longer the experts "we" said they were last month?

Please quote where i stated I supported it? If you actually read, you would have seen my stance on it.

 

[sndmn11]

Please quote where i stated I supported it? If you actually read, you would have seen my stance on it.

I thought you bailed? I was quoting @ElDiablito

 

[ElDiablito]

I read it, my questions remain unanswered by you guys asking for petition support.

CPW recommended status quo, are they no longer the experts "we" said they were last month?

Did you miss the part about half of the voting members of the working group being current CPW employees or Commissioners?!

 

[sndmn11]

Did you miss the part about half of the voting members of the working group being current CPW employees or Commissioners?!

View attachment 795292

I didn't. There are more employees at CPW, correct?

Was there also a recommendation by CPW to the commission?

 

[Hnthrdr]

The two separate "working groups" that came to different conclusions were both via a Polis election?

Polis appointed commissioners, the working group wasn’t selected by a vote, but it was selected by committee. Heck I threw my hat in to be apart of the working group I know a lot of regular joes that did and none of them were picked.

 

[Hnthrdr]

There ya go! So random folks who are not the experts employed by CPW.

Then CPW, the hired professionals "we" all said should make wildlife decisions, had a separate recommendation to maintain status quo.

Same questions as before:
1) are the hired professionals at CPW suddenly inept?
2) What is preventing R from applying for these hunt codes with their 1st choice?

1) the hired professionals are professionals. The appointed folks, are largely a result of the gov having an anti hunting activist husband, very few of them should be sitting on the commission, it’s not paid btw, but it is what we would consider a powerful position, I’m sure some would disagree

2) nothings. I stand by that it should be hard capped and you should lose points when you get an A list tag, no matter how you get it. I believe the losing points for a list tags was up for debate as well not sure how the working group feels about it

 

[sndmn11]

2) nothings. I stand by that it should be hard capped and you should lose points when you get an A list tag, no matter how you get it. I believe the losing points for a list tags was up for debate as well not sure how the working group feels about it

I'd get on board with that, but it was conveniently left out of this petition.

1) the hired professionals are professionals. The appointed folks, are largely a result of the gov having an anti hunting activist husband, very few of them should be sitting on the commission, it’s not paid btw, but it is what we would consider a powerful position, I’m sure some would disagree

Precisely. You are a fire fighter and had a chance at making this recommendation. You are smart and you recognize the greater good over your own advancement, but you are not a wildlife expert. Less than 1/3rd of the working group that is being propped up are experts.

Conversely, a recommendation from CPW, the same CPW that "we" simultaneously we're spending millions of dollars calling experts, is being labeled as unfair.

Mayor Johnston is making decisions about DFD. Do you want him listening to folks within the organization, or folks like me who played with fireworks as a kid and just want things best for memyselfi and somehow got appointed to a committee?

 

[Hnthrdr]

I'd get on board with that, but it was conveniently left out of this petition.



Precisely. You are a fire fighter and had a chance at making this recommendation. You are smart and you recognize the greater good over your own advancement, but you are not a wildlife expert. Less than 1/3rd of the working group that is being propped up are experts.

Conversely, a recommendation from CPW, the same CPW that "we" simultaneously we're spending millions of dollars calling experts, is being labeled as unfair.

Mayor Johnston is making decisions about DFD. Do you want him listening to folks within the organization, or folks like me who played with fireworks as a kid and just want things best for memyselfi and somehow got appointed to a committee?

Yeah I sort of get that argument. It seems that the commission ( kids that played with fireworks with politically connected kids) vote on and make season dates, tag allocation R/NR ect. The professionals are setting tag numbers by unit, and advising the appointees/ giving recommendations which up until recently were probably better suited to make these decisions. Who thought that we would have animal rights activists managing our hunting regs? Wasn’t on my bingo card till recently.

The working group was created to help advise this group of largely unqualified political appointees to address a social problem that has arisen from real or perceived injustices in R/NR tag allocations ect. I guess I am biased being from Co and typically only hunting Co, I do apply in a few other states which are not generous at all with NR, and I don’t feel entitled to tags there. If I hunt out of state for big game a few times in my life I’ll be fine, heck if I never do I’ll be fine too

 

[sndmn11]

The working group was created to help advise this group of largely unqualified political appointees to address a social problem that has arisen from real or perceived injustices in R/NR tag allocations ect.

To advise and provide a recommendation, but not to dictate doctrine.

CPW also provided a recommendation, but also was not dictating doctrine.

The commission ends up with two recommendations to highlight ideas and different perspectives, and then decides something that can be completely different than either recommendation, a blend of both, or fully inline with one (or both if they are the same recommendation).

"We" as hunters propped up the abilities of CPW and touted their expertise. If I'm on the commission, I am going to rely on the experts at CPW more so than people who are not experts. Just like "we" hunters scoof at ballot box biology and campaign against it. Adamantly.

This petition is dangerous because it highlights the greed of a relatively small portion of hunters who want to double dip by greedily banking preference points while snagging more/"better" down choice hunt codes. More importantly, it blatantly states their is distrust for CPW and propagates the idea of their incompetence.

Anti-hunting campaign for next election...
"Colorado Resident Hunters Alliance doesn't trust CPW to manage wildlife"
...and derivatives.

We as hunters need CPW on our side in Colorado. The same voters who turned down a lion ban also voted to increase our taxes on firearms. We cannot undermine what was accomplished a month ago by turning around and hypocritically saying, "well, CPW doesn't really have any expertise". There goes any credibility that was built up with the non-hunting voters.

The simple solution for those complaining that they didn't draw a 2nd-3rd choice, is to apply for it as a 1st choice and go hunt. NOT to try and change the rules and campaign that CPW is inept and not worthy of trust.

 

[realunlucky]

After this we can work towards a Colorado plan that implements a pyramid system that recognizes incentives by birth place....
Starting with an extra "native" draw only open to those who were actually born in colorado.
Afterwards any tags left over can then be drawn by those currently living in Colorado but born elsewhere.
If any tags remain we prioritize anyone residing in a state that touches Colorado.
Finally if any tags remain any other US citizen can apply for it.

If someone in the tier above you wants your tag at any point before the season starts you'd be required by law to swap them. Anyone refusing will be banned from Colorado forever

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[ElDiablito]

"We" as hunters propped up the abilities of CPW and touted their expertise. If I'm on the commission, I am going to rely on the experts at CPW more so than people who are not experts.

Half of the committee that unanimously recommended this to the Commission are CPW employees (experts) and Commissioners. The only real argument against this is the fiscal impact (which was apparently the official CPW argument against the change).

But, there are numerous ways to make up the budget shortfall.

 

[realunlucky]

The only real argument against this is the fiscal impact (which was apparently the official CPW argument against the change).

That wasn't the only valid argument- They said unless there is an alternative funding plan it was non-starter for discussion so no other cons were discussed.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

 

[Ucsdryder]

This is all dumb. Can we just get the reissue tags to open 1 hour early to residents and I’ll never ask for anything from CPW ever again?

 

[Ucsdryder]

This is all dumb. Can we just get the reissue tags to open 1 hour early to residents and I’ll never ask for anything from CPW ever again?

Who’s starting the petition? That’s one worth signing. And no, we aren’t adding something dumb like “you can only get a leftover for the unit you applied in the primary”.