I think that some of the commissioners have forgotten why we are here in the first place. It's because resident hunters demanded change and the commission did nothing. Three years later the resident hunters demanded change and the commission did nothing. A year later a state legislator ran a bill to put R/NR allocation into statute. CPW defeated that bill in part by promising to actually get something done about allocation on their own.
Thanks as always, Oak for being the finger on the pulse of CPW and the Commission. I fully agree with your criticism of their latest inaction.
As a current member of the Sportspersons' Roundtable, I respectfully disagree with Manager Martin's characterization of the roles of Caucus representatives and his description of the Roundtable above, posted by
@Mudranger1 . There is no debate about policy decisions or anything else at Statewide Roundtable meetings. Discussions of the Roundtable are purely advisory, the Roundtable does not seek or offer consensus. It has no vote on policy decisions and does not generate any recommendations in its own name. The Commission and CPW have no formal obligation to include any input from members of the Roundtable. There is no such thing as a 'Sportspersons' Roundtable Decision, Recommendation or Opinion.'
Rather, the Roundtable gathers input and feedback from constituent sportspeople in four regions of the state through the Caucus meeting process and otherwise. Input gathered through the filter of the Roundtable process has more influence with CPW and the Commission than an individual call or email in one regard; CPW considers it a consensus of multiple users, it is combined with similar opinions by other users. In no way does that guarantee any Roundtable influence with the agency or the Commission. When the Roundtable group took the License Allocation survey before it was offered to the public last year, the results were similar to those reported by CPW for all respondents to the survey. The same survey results which made zero difference to the Commissioners in today's meeting.
.
The Caucus process
@Mudranger1 included above is well worth attending and participating in, and Caucus delegates Goodrich and McCormack will summarize feedback from the Southeast Caucus meeting at the August Roundtable meeting in Grand junction along with Caucus input from the other 3 regions of the state. Sadly, at this August meeting there will be no actual debate, no official Roundtable criticism of any proposal or Commission decision, no formal Roundtable recommendations made.
My current frustration comes from the lack of results thus far in the latest season survey process, which itself dilutes the 5 year big game season structure cycle the Commission is required to conduct. As Oak disclosed above, the Commission is minimizing their own survey process. In my opinion and based on Commissioners' statements reported above, the Commission is using Chamber of Commerce and Outfitter pressure and their own 'revenue impact model' to disregard the input of all those who chose to participate in the survey CPW touted. If you don't know what an Antler Dance is, this is one. Since the Commission is deaf to its own telephone, I join Oak in encouraging every hunter who cares to contact each Commissioner. I'll be sending them this posting. I hope you will edit, and join me.
https://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/CommissionMembers.aspx
