As the article says a point system of some sort is needed when you have to manage tags when supply is out paced by demand. My own opinion is where Colorado went wrong is to not allow banking of unused points. A person has 10 points and under the present system if he applies for a tag that takes 7 points he gets his tag and eats up all his 10 points. When the next year point value for that same WMU is figured based on past years, that 10 points is used into the equation. If there were more than a couple similar tags awarded those inflated points figure into the new value needed to draw. This simply can cause point creep in a much faster way than if the 7 points needed was taken and the hunter ended up with 3 remaining points. I looked at some data a few years ago from Colorado snd some WMU point creep exceeded 1 per year thus making it impossible to ever grow enough points to get the tag. People like Flags with 20 someodd points are the only ones who can really use the points system effectively but may never live long enough to get that once in a lifetime tag they have been paying for all through the years. Hunters age out and that once in a lifetime hunt using a cane can be tough. Like the article says the worst case is to die with a hat full of points. DOW wins hunters lose is the end game. Another plus for hunters if they allow banking of unused points is that a hunter like flags who has a lifetime of points could decide to use the points for 2 or 3 high value hunts that he wouldn't have wanted to burn all of his points on by chosing one of them.
Last edited by Champlain Islander; 11-08-2021 at 09:59 AM.