CPW Preference Point Banking Survey

[theGinsue]

Curious many of you have more points than I do but didn't receive the email/survey request. I do tend to regularly (practically yearly) get "randomly selected" by CPW to participate in an annual "Harvest Survey".

I have 18 elk points. I'd been saving up the points (and buying OTC bull elk permit) to use on Trinchera Ranch where harvesting a bull usually meant a once-in-a-lifetime trophy bull. In order to draw out there you had to have 17-22 pts. 2020 was the last year Trinchera participated in the program so now I have to figure out where I want to use the points. Very disappointed by the turn of events.

I appreciate everyones input on the point banking option. I think I'll participate in this survey (I usually avoid ALL surveys) and plan to go against this option.

As encorehunter mentioned, several years ago (around 10?) they tried this for 1 year. One of my hunting partners actually got to take advantage of the "we'll only take as many points as needed for you to draw a permit" that year. None of my other hunting partners, nor I, had enough points or applied for a permit to use points that year. I recall that there was a huge uproar over DOW (I believe this was prior to it being CPW) doing this so the next year it was back to "all or nothing". Whatever CPW decides to do they need to stick with it or it will unfairly effect a lot of hunters.




ETA: Just completed the survey. I should have taken screen shots of each page of the survey as when I finished I was unable to go back to any of the pages.

The point banking system they are considering would subtract a penalty of 2 points per species for each successful award. For instance, if 5 points are required to draw a permit you would be charged 7 points to get the permit but any of your remaining points would stay intact.

Naw, I'll just continue to accrue until I find the area I want to apply for.

Oh, and for those who complained about people just applying for a permit and even one who said you should be charged for the permit up front: In those days if you didn't draw a permit or only applied for the point, they charged you the full permit fee, then returned all but $3 3-4 months later (after the draw). I can't see why that was necessary if you were only applying for a point except they got to draw interest off of your money for those few months. Nowadays, if you only apply for a point they charge you $7. If you apply for a permit but don't draw you still pay them $7 for the "chance" and get a point as a consolation prize.

It used to be that Wildlife was in the black but Parks was in the red. As predicted when they merged, prices have gone up and Parks is dragging all of CPW into the red while sucking away the positive revenue generated from the Wildlife side of the house leaving it in worse condition than it could/should be. To make up for their losses, and to help out the Parks side, they continue to talk about increasing fees on hunters and fishermen (persons). The whole thing is souring me to participating in the game at all.

[def90]

Curious many of you have more points than I do but didn't receive the email/survey request. I do tend to regularly (practically yearly) get "randomly selected" by CPW to participate in an annual "Harvest Survey".

I have 18 elk points. I'd been saving up the points (and buying OTC bull elk permit) to use on Trinchera Ranch where harvesting a bull usually meant a once-in-a-lifetime trophy bull. In order to draw out there you had to have 17-22 pts. 2020 was the last year Trinchera participated in the program so now I have to figure out where I want to use the points. Very disappointed by the turn of events.

I appreciate everyones input on the point banking option. I think I'll participate in this survey (I usually avoid ALL surveys) and plan to go against this option.

As encorehunter mentioned, several years ago (around 10?) they tried this for 1 year. One of my hunting partners actually got to take advantage of the "we'll only take as many points as needed for you to draw a permit" that year. None of my other hunting partners, nor I, had enough points or applied for a permit to use points that year. I recall that there was a huge uproar over DOW (I believe this was prior to it being CPW) doing this so the next year it was back to "all or nothing". Whatever CPW decides to do they need to stick with it or it will unfairly effect a lot of hunters.




ETA: Just completed the survey. I should have taken screen shots of each page of the survey as when I finished I was unable to go back to any of the pages.

The point banking system they are considering would subtract a penalty of 2 points per species for each successful award. For instance, if 5 points are required to draw a permit you would be charged 7 points to get the permit but any of your remaining points would stay intact.

Naw, I'll just continue to accrue until I find the area I want to apply for.

Oh, and for those who complained about people just applying for a permit and even one who said you should be charged for the permit up front: In those days if you didn't draw a permit or only applied for the point, they charged you the full permit fee, then returned all but $3 3-4 months later (after the draw). I can't see why that was necessary if you were only applying for a point except they got to draw interest off of your money for those few months. Nowadays, if you only apply for a point they charge you $7. If you apply for a permit but don't draw you still pay them $7 for the "chance" and get a point as a consolation prize.

It used to be that Wildlife was in the black but Parks was in the red. As predicted when they merged, prices have gone up and Parks is dragging all of CPW into the red while sucking away the positive revenue generated from the Wildlife side of the house leaving it in worse condition than it could/should be. To make up for their losses, and to help out the Parks side, they continue to talk about increasing fees on hunters and fishermen (persons). The whole thing is souring me to participating in the game at all.

You would benefit greatly from a points banking system so hats off to you if you replied that you were not in favor.

The issue of not charging up front is that you get a much larger pool applying for those tags because there is no upfront investment. This can be seen via the number of tags that are returned and entered in to the secondary draw. Maybe a better system would be that returned tags go to the next person in line that appied for that tag vs the tag just going back in to the pool. I know I've missed out on tags only to see them show up in the secondary draw.

CPW vs Parks.. I've done the research, they maintain their own separate budgets and accounts and only share on the admin side as in back office staff in the way of sharing a building, HR and bean counters. CPW has to keep their license fee income and expenditures separated by law, if they do not they would not qualify for federal pittman robertson funds.