CPW 2026 Draw Stats are out

[Esetter77]

IMO, it ends after 1st choice.
I don't see how you can argue someone wanted it if they didn't put in for 1st choice....

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.
But to me it's simple: I put in for my first choice with my points in unit X and hope I draw it, but may not (and didn't) because of point creep. Rather than do nothing and not hunt I can try for the next best thing which is a unit I MAY draw as a 2nd choice. Your logic may dictate nothing matters after 1st choice, but the rest of aren't confined to your logic. The only reason I care at all about my 2nd choice is because increased hunting pressure (point creep) forced me to.

So I'm pointing out that a big part of the reason I didn't draw my second choice is because a very significant portion (the majority) of those tags went to non-residents, a fact many people do not realize is even possible because we are often told "up to 25% of tags go to nonresidents"

Frankly I could care less if you think my logic is sound or I have an argument or not.
My annoyance here is not with non-residents it's with CO Parks and Wildlife for trying to placate residents by telling only "up to 25%" of tags go to non-residents while fine-printing a very large percentage of tags away to non-residents.

 

[wildwilderness]

As a CO resident I'm pretty annoyed with the fact that more tags got allocated to non residents than residents in the unit my 18yo son and I put in for and didn't draw. I think most folks, myself included until recently, don't realize that the 75/25 tag allocation only applies to 1st choice draw. If tags make it to the 2nd round, that 25% cap is apparently thrown out the window and in this case MORE 2nd choice tags were allocated to non-residents than residents and more tags overall (1555 of 3000) for this unit were allocated to non-residents than residents and it's not because residents weren't trying to get them. If you applied for this unit 2nd choice as a non-resident you had a better chance of drawing than if you put in as 2nd choice as a resident. Thanks a ton CPW.

View attachment 1074965

The 2nd choice odds were actually the same Res vs NR. It’s just that more NR applied so more drew out of shear numbers. But that’s how an equal random chance works if you understand statistics

 

[Esetter77]

Shouldn’t someone’s first choice get drawn first , over someone’s second choice?

Well that is the real crux of the issue. Certainly resident 1st choice over resident 2nd choice and NR 1st over NR 2nd. But I would argue once the 25% NR cap is met those 1st choice non residents should NOT automatically get preference over residents. Some of these units are getting so out of wack that well over 50% of the tags are going to non residents and generally speaking I don't think residents realize this nor would they approve of it if they realized it was even possible. And the CPW has a financial incentive to just keep their mouth shut and let residents think they are getting 75% of the tags while taking in the extra NR money.

 

[S.Clancy]

Well that is the real crux of the issue. Certainly resident 1st choice over resident 2nd choice and NR 1st over NR 2nd. But I would argue once the 25% NR cap is met those 1st choice non residents should NOT automatically get preference over residents. Some of these units are getting so out of wack that well over 50% of the tags are going to non residents and generally speaking I don't think residents realize this nor would they approve of it if they realized it was even possible. And the CPW has a financial incentive to just keep their mouth shut and let residents think they are getting 75% of the tags while taking in the extra NR money.

I'm guessing that CPW's position on this is basically "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you."

 

[Esetter77]

The 2nd choice odds were actually the same Res vs NR. It’s just that more NR applied so more drew out of shear numbers. But that’s how an equal random chance works if you understand statistics

Yes, I did not word that very well. All the 2nd choice applications initially had the same chances of drawing since it was a random draw. However how it actually worked out is 37% of NR actually got drawn vs only 32% of residents so the numbers ended up in the NR favor even beyond their higher entry numbers, but yes that 5% discrepancy was just due to random luck.

 

[Serrano]

Shouldn’t someone’s first choice get drawn first , over someone’s second choice?

Thats risk of trying to gain a preference point and get the tag ….

Talk to me about AZ and NM.
It doesn't work that way there.

 

[southLA]

Full point of creep on my 1st choice. Luckily get my second choice.

 

[Serrano]

Most (ALL?) other states have HARD caps for NR. Some as low as 6%.

Next you will be saying NR with more points should have priority.

 

[Serrano]

Full point of creep on my 1st choice. Luckily get my second choice.

I saw 2.5 point creep on a tag.

 

[Jethro]

a fact many people do not realize is even possible because we are often told "up to 25% of tags go to nonresidents"

We get it. This exact argument has been had here over and over and over. You’ll have to live with it 1 more draw.

 

[Jethro]

Hmmm seeing plenty of units not going 75/25, and yes there are plenty of residents applying. Wonder if they are taking the landowner tags off the top of resident tags?

LO comes off total quota before res/nr split.

For sure, I’m talking about units that have plenty of R applying with a 1st choice and it’s showing 63-65% of tags going to R, and NR getting 30+ %

Was there enough res 1st choices to fill 75% of the quota?