New Colorado Shed Hunting Regs
General Topic
Contributors to this thread:
Destroyer350 16-Nov-17
PECO 16-Nov-17
Ucsdryder 16-Nov-17
Grasshopper 16-Nov-17
ohiohunter 16-Nov-17
cnelk 16-Nov-17
oldgoat 16-Nov-17
Huntcell 16-Nov-17
Glunt@work 16-Nov-17
ohiohunter 17-Nov-17
Franklin 17-Nov-17
smarba 17-Nov-17
Destroyer350 17-Nov-17
stealthycat 17-Nov-17
elk yinzer 17-Nov-17
Glunt@work 17-Nov-17
ohiohunter 17-Nov-17
Bowriter 18-Nov-17
Aspen Ghost 18-Nov-17
PECO 18-Nov-17
Bowriter 19-Nov-17
JakeBrake 19-Nov-17
From: Destroyer350
16-Nov-17

Destroyer350's Link
New shed hunting regs come with a $40 license and is closed from Jan 1 - Apr 30 west of I25. I'd bet in 5 years they up it to $100 the way they have been doing things. In the areas I Mountain Lion hunt I look for sheds in between sets. Doesn't make any sense to me why I cant pick up a chalky shed that's been laying there for 3 years.

From: PECO
16-Nov-17
I must have had one too many beers and passed out. A nightmare I'm having. This can not be of any truth.

From: Ucsdryder
16-Nov-17
How about not letting people sell sheds. That will get rid of half the BS.

From: Grasshopper
16-Nov-17
As I said in CO forum:

This article suggests things have been finalized, and that is not accurate.

I was at the wildlife commission meeting in Yuma today, and there was discussion of the draft options. The the issue has not been finalized yet.

A final decision will likely come at the January commission meeting. There was discussion of a fee today, some support it some do not. Big Game Forever testified in support of the fee, no other groups testified in person.

Moving forward, CPW staff was directed by the commission to draft revised language and options for commissioner discussion and decision. The revised language will be available for public comment prior to the January meeting. If you care about the issue, I would advise you submit your comments to the wildlife commission.

My take on the meeting is everyone agrees with the intent of a season, which is to prevent disturbing animals and their young during a critical and sensitive time of year, on winter range. Many report hordes of folks with an intent to earn money exhibiting behavior that is detrimental, especially to mule deer. The regulation intent is not to prevent an average guy from picking up an antler he finds while out hunting in the fall. There was discussion of recent collection closures in Utah, which seemed to send the Utah collectors into Colorado to satisfy what might be a commercial intent to earn a living.

It is an interesting discussion, and many think if your out there earning an income from the wildlife resource(consumtive use), not only should you be regulated to preserve the wildlife resource, but you should also pay for it including the time game wardens spend chasing guys stressing deer. Personally, I tend to agree

From: ohiohunter
16-Nov-17
Wonder how much a non res license is?

A huge group of guys rumored to be tines up crew spent a few months in the gila and left with 3000lbs! A few flatbeds full.

From: cnelk
16-Nov-17
Licenses will probably be limited. Then that will create another Pref Point system to high quality shed hunting units :)

From: oldgoat
16-Nov-17
Yeah, we don't really go shed hunting but occasionally find them while hunting. Doubt I'm going to spring for a license no more than we ever find! I think a license for people commercially hunting them would be fine, but I think if we find them while big game hunting we should be exempt from the license requirement

From: Huntcell
16-Nov-17
Can see it now all the anguish and hand wringing, Point creep in my premium shed unit! Arrrh!

And the big money going for the Governors all unit Shed Tag.

And what about sheds currently in possession! Need to get them I.D. And registered or risk confiscation by the local shed compliance officer. Just imagine the annual auction of confiscated sheds.

From: Glunt@work
16-Nov-17
"It is an interesting discussion, and many think if your out there earning an income from the wildlife resource(consumptive use), not only should you be regulated to preserve the wildlife resource, but you should also pay for it including the time game wardens spend chasing guys stressing deer. Personally, I tend to agree"

I also agree but we should start at the top of list of people who are using wildlife commercially.

From: ohiohunter
17-Nov-17
In what manner Glunt? LO tags? If so, I couldnt agree more, but I think it’s easier to tax the hunting population than to fight landowners. What would it take to get changes moving in the right direction?

Speaking of, in NM a habitat improvement tax is in required but I’ve personally not witnessed these improvements. I’m not Saying it isn’t happening but it would be nice to receive announcements similar to fish stocking reports. Just a thought.

From: Franklin
17-Nov-17
Some states are talking about having a "Mushroom Hunting Permit"....the state owns everything within it`s borders.

From: smarba
17-Nov-17
Mushroom hunting...use the biggest broadhead you can shoot accurately. Magnus Bullhead should be perfect.

From: Destroyer350
17-Nov-17
Thanks for the clarification Grasshopper. Eastman's makes it sound like its something that passed. I think there are very few who are making a living off shed hunting - especially selling chalk or hard white sheds which is what you would find during the closing. People who are antler buyers are a different story and I guarantee you they are reporting that income. If not, that is something that should be addressed. I have sold a few sheds and all it does is pay for gas money so I can get back out there.

From: stealthycat
17-Nov-17
money money money

From: elk yinzer
17-Nov-17
I agree with the sentiment that you shouldn't be allowed to sell anything you gather from public land, that solves the root cause of the issue.

From: Glunt@work
17-Nov-17
"In what manner Glunt? LO tags?...."

Well, my family hunts and fishes and I pay the Parks and Wildlife a few hundred dollars a year in license fees for our stamps and licenses.

Landowners don't pay the CPW for the vouchers or the benefits of programs like Ranching for Wildlife but it can be argued that some access and habitat preservation is compensation.

Outfitters, local businesses, equipment manufacturers, professional photographers, tourism businesses commercially benefit from wildlife but don't directly contribute money to the CPW .

From: ohiohunter
17-Nov-17
I thought that was your direction... Its not a comfortable feeling knowing the avg joe is getting shafted while Johnny rancher gets handed $80k in tags b/c his 5mi family ranch has been handed down to him.

From: Bowriter
18-Nov-17
My sentiment is this: If you are on public land, for any reason, consumptive or non-consumptive use, you should pay a fee. I hiker or photographer should pay less than a hunter. But...both are "using", the land and should pay for that use. However, private land is a different story. Why should a rancher have to have a permit to shed hunt or for that matter, do anything other than buy required tags or licenses for consumptive use on his own land? Now...is shed hunting consumptive use? What is the difference between that and cutting up dead, fallen timber for firewood?

Of course, the solid and fair answer is, just make it illegal to sell antlers by anybody, to anybody. Probably need to attach some sort of gun control to that, too. (That's a joke in case somebody missed that.)

From: Aspen Ghost
18-Nov-17
A fee to use public land? Bring on Robin Hood!

From: PECO
18-Nov-17
No one should have to pay to go for a walk on public land.

From: Bowriter
19-Nov-17
If no one pays to go on public land, how do you offset the cost of maintaining public land? Or do you just say, here it is, have at it, do as you wish?

From: JakeBrake
19-Nov-17
It’s called taxes...I already pay for my public land...shouldn’t have to pay twice

  • Sitka Gear