Group applications under Colorado's new hybrid draw?

[djewell87]

Has there been any clarification on how group applications will work with Colorado's new draw structure?

 

[Fitzwho]

Haven’t seen anything specific, but that won’t take affect until 2028, so there’s a couple years for them to provide those clarifications.

 

[Timberline001]

I’m hoping they average points instead of the current system of lowest point number.

 

[djewell87]

I’m hoping they average points instead of the current system of lowest point number.

That's what I'm hoping too. In two different states my dad forgot to put in one year and now now I have a wasted extra point in those two states for a group app. I guess I should have referred to it as their split draw, but the current hybrid draw excludes group applications. I'm hoping that this isn't the case with the split draw, that would suck.

 

[Timberline001]

That's what I'm hoping too. In two different states my dad forgot to put in one year and now now I have a wasted extra point in those two states for a group app. I guess I should have referred to it as their split draw, but the current hybrid draw excludes group applications. I'm hoping that this isn't the case with the split draw, that would suck.

I’m not sure I get what you mean, you can currently apply as a group in CO. You just go in with the lowest points in your group instead of the average. If you’re a non resident you’re already excluded from the hybrid whether you’re in a group or not.

 

[djewell87]

I’m not sure I get what you mean, you can currently apply as a group in CO. You just go in with the lowest points in your group instead of the average. If you’re a non resident you’re already excluded from the hybrid whether you’re in a group or not.

I'm just referring to how groups are excluded from the hybrid draw and that I hope the new split draw doesn't exclude groups also.

 

[Timberline001]

I'm just referring to how groups are excluded from the hybrid draw and that I hope the new split draw doesn't exclude groups also.

Non-residents currently can’t draw on the hybrid anyway. In the split non-residents will be included in the random draw. I’m sure groups are included.

 

[djewell87]

Non-residents currently can’t draw on the hybrid anyway. In the split non-residents will be included in the random draw. I’m sure groups are included.

I didn't say anything about nonresidents in the hybrid or at all. I'm referring to the hybrid because it is one of the only examples of how Colorado handled a random draw. The hybrid doesn't allow groups, probably because it creates issues with how groups would drawn. I think that the same thing would make group applications complicated for the random draw portion of the split. They could make group applications count as one entry with the average points for the group or lowest point holder's point value. They could also do something like New Mexico where if anyone in the group draws and there are enough tags left in that hunt the entire group gets awarded. I'm really curious about how they are going to handle it and was seeing if anyone heard anything.

 

[Jethro]

2028 changes will not include point averaging. Group applications will still be based off the lowest point holder in the group. Will not go over quota if group is larger than the number of tags available.

 

[resident vs nonresident]

I’m glad they kept it as current system with group drawing at lowest persons point level.
Im against averaging points as it would allow for more point creep and more point holders to just sit on sidelines

 

[ColoradoV]

I’m glad they kept it as current system with group drawing at lowest persons point level.
Im against averaging points as it would allow for more point creep and more point holders to just sit on sidelines

Hey with the changes in 2028 point creep will no doubt explode in all units so I doubt a few point averages would even be a drop in the bucket w what's coming...

 

[resident vs nonresident]

Hey with the changes in 2028 point creep will no doubt explode in all units so I doubt a few point averages would even be a drop in the bucket w what's coming...

While I sympathize with people who really want to group up and average, as a whole it’s a terrible system and will drive more point creep.
I’m gonna throw hypothetical out there: I’m CO resident. I would buy points for my wife, kid, n few friends who don’t hunt but won’t care if they had an account that I managed and paid for.
As a resident it’ll cost me roughly (at current rate): $60 to build elk/deer/pronghorn points per person. That’s nearly same as single elk point in WY. I’ll gladly pay that under 4-6 people’s accounts which will ensure me that I never hunt 0pp tag ever again by averaging their points and rotating every 4-6years through my group.
Eating cost of Reaident tags is also not much for whoever I apply as a group with.
People do this in all states where averaging is allowed and it’s really screwing over average Joe hunter trying to play the point game solo.
So while few people who are honest may not be happy, as a whole system we’re better off NOT allowing any point averaging
Wouldn’t you agree?

 

[johnsd16]

While I sympathize with people who really want to group up and average, as a whole it’s a terrible system and will drive more point creep.
I’m gonna throw hypothetical out there: I’m CO resident. I would buy points for my wife, kid, n few friends who don’t hunt but won’t care if they had an account that I managed and paid for.
As a resident it’ll cost me roughly (at current rate): $60 to build elk/deer/pronghorn points per person. That’s nearly same as single elk point in WY. I’ll gladly pay that under 4-6 people’s accounts which will ensure me that I never hunt 0pp tag ever again by averaging their points and rotating every 4-6years through my group.
Eating cost of Reaident tags is also not much for whoever I apply as a group with.
People do this in all states where averaging is allowed and it’s really screwing over average Joe hunter trying to play the point game solo.
So while few people who are honest may not be happy, as a whole system we’re better off NOT allowing any point averaging
Wouldn’t you agree?

Absolutely. That’s why they have the system they do now, too much abuse of grandma having 20 points, drawing as part of a group then turning her tag back every year so she can apply again to average. The lowest point thing does suck in some regards but it is the most abuse preventing measure IMO.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Has there been any clarification on how group applications will work with Colorado's new draw structure?

Likely will be a cluster, last I checked for a group to successfully draw, all applicants must individually draw. So with 1/2 the tags going random and 1/2 going to high point holders I foresee this could make group apps tougher to draw especially the bigger the group

 

[Hnthrdr]

While I sympathize with people who really want to group up and average, as a whole it’s a terrible system and will drive more point creep.
I’m gonna throw hypothetical out there: I’m CO resident. I would buy points for my wife, kid, n few friends who don’t hunt but won’t care if they had an account that I managed and paid for.
As a resident it’ll cost me roughly (at current rate): $60 to build elk/deer/pronghorn points per person. That’s nearly same as single elk point in WY. I’ll gladly pay that under 4-6 people’s accounts which will ensure me that I never hunt 0pp tag ever again by averaging their points and rotating every 4-6years through my group.
Eating cost of Reaident tags is also not much for whoever I apply as a group with.
People do this in all states where averaging is allowed and it’s really screwing over average Joe hunter trying to play the point game solo.
So while few people who are honest may not be happy, as a whole system we’re better off NOT allowing any point averaging
Wouldn’t you agree?

Amen!

 

[Jethro]

last I checked for a group to successfully draw, all applicants must individually draw

What does this mean?

 

[Hnthrdr]

Say your group of 5 hunters has a 2 points (lowest point holder is group average). The unit you want to draw, draws out at 50% with 2 points. So 3 points guaranteed, but maybe with 2 points. I was under the impression that all 5 members would have to win a coin toss as it were for the whole group to draw.

 

[Hnthrdr]

What does this mean?

Sorry I worded that oddly, see my last post

 

[Mighty Mouse]

While I sympathize with people who really want to group up and average, as a whole it’s a terrible system and will drive more point creep.
I’m gonna throw hypothetical out there: I’m CO resident. I would buy points for my wife, kid, n few friends who don’t hunt but won’t care if they had an account that I managed and paid for.
As a resident it’ll cost me roughly (at current rate): $60 to build elk/deer/pronghorn points per person. That’s nearly same as single elk point in WY. I’ll gladly pay that under 4-6 people’s accounts which will ensure me that I never hunt 0pp tag ever again by averaging their points and rotating every 4-6years through my group.
Eating cost of Reaident tags is also not much for whoever I apply as a group with.
People do this in all states where averaging is allowed and it’s really screwing over average Joe hunter trying to play the point game solo.
So while few people who are honest may not be happy, as a whole system we’re better off NOT allowing any point averaging
Wouldn’t you agree?

Agreed. I too oppose point averaging for the same reason. Colorado’s lenient return policy would make point averaging especially ripe for abuse…build up a bank of points in your wife’s name, use her points to help draw yourself a tag, send her tag back during the early return period, get her tag money refunded and her points restored and use her points to do the same thing again next year.

 

[Jethro]

Sorry I worded that oddly, see my last post

I don’t think anything is changing much from what we have been used to in past with regards to group apps. Posted below is what went up for approval at March meetings, and despite very little talk about those meetings, I believe was approved for 2028.