Resident vs Non-resident
Colorado
We need to stop fighting with each other. Strength is in numbers. You resident hunters need us non resident hunters to pay the bills. Resident hunters whined about us and look what happened. CPW wants our money to pay the bills. Your license fees and winning won't get it done. So let's unite not fight.
^^^^^ agree!!! I don’t care if people hunt with a sling shot and a rock we all enjoy the same thing.
I also agree, partly. The anti hunters, including those in the commission do not care about the revenue from hunting. If they could do away with hunting all together they will find another way to get revenue. We need to quit thinking they rely on revenue from hunters. Force example, CO is now trying to pass a ballot measure to tax guns and ammo. The anti hunters are organized, we are not. We have multiple hunting organizations that all have different inferest. I don't know if all those organizations could all get on the same page and unite. This might give us the influence we hunters desperately need.
Wouldn't the tax bill need to go through on a ballot?
"I don’t care if people hunt with a sling shot and a rock we all enjoy the same thing."
Until it comes to Xbows. Then all bets are off ;)
Yes, tax bill would have to go thru ballot. The proposal is to put it on the November ballot. If that doesn't work they will just call it a "fee" and pass without a vote.
Relichunter nailed it. Fallow the money!
Relic what you're say is as long as the residents look after the non resident interest first.
The CPW has plenty of money even if the non residents fees get cut a little. The CPW budget is the largest in the country. They are running a surplus currently. If they need to tighten their belt a little so be it.
How about you as a non resident stand with us residents and acknowledge that having opportunities to hunt each year with your family in your own state is not only reasonable, but right. Also that Colorado has been beyond generous with non-residence compared to any other western state, if the current OTC units were to stay OTC for residence and draw for non-residence. Colorado would still offer more opportunities to non-residence than any other state.
Always cracks me up when somebody suggest that everybody should unite, but that uniting should always be on the side of the coin of the person making that suggestion.
Im a lifetime Colorado resident and believe the reason we are in the position we are now is because of resident bowhunters always complaining. Lots of people moving here wanting to change things.
Relic, did you provide any support to the Res hunters over the last two weeks in their battle against the CPW senate vote? Was an opportunity to unite that didn’t involve $ or getting tags.
The anti's have you guys divided and bickering. This is why they are winning. They've already divided rifle vs archery. Why aren't rifle orgs actively protecting archers from the change from OTC to draw? The rifle guys will be next to lose OTC and when it happens all the archery guys will sit quietly because the rifle guys didn't help when archery lost OTC.
Divide and conquer. Kill off one group at a time. And instead of fighting them you are all fighting each other.
"Im a lifetime Colorado resident and believe the reason we are in the position we are now is because of resident bowhunters always complaining"
Says the guy who relies on NonRes $$$
Relies? You dont know me very well.
Is there a Colorado rifle hunters association?
Forest, with all due respect, can you give an example of an outfitter who has spoken up to the PWC or at a forum/Roundtable in support of resident bowhunters? Because I've been involved with this process for over 40 years and I never have.
Also, what percentage of your clients are resident bowhunters?
AG, rifle hunters,muzzleloader hunters, and many within the CPW have been fighting against, tesrifying against, bejng pissed about bowhunters for my entire 40 years of involvement. What bowhunters and CBA have been doing is trying to maximize bowhunting opportunity. Now we are trying to save it.
Meanwhile, we have rifle hunters and muzzleloader seasons for multiple species right during the heart of archery season, besides the visible explosion of nonconsumptive users of the woods in September. This state has six million freaking people, and I swear a million of them are in my elk unit in the fall, doing whatever nonhunters do.
I've posted this a number of times before, but again, a high ranking DOW official told me over 40 years ago that bowhunters were a pain in the ass and didn't do anything to help with management objectives, and if it wasn't for the "damned CBA" they would be able to put archery and ML into the same 9 day season and "be done with us". Today, there is a demonstrable anti-bowhunting culture within the CPW and PWC.
No outfitters have spoken in support of residents at any meeting. I'm guessing 90+ percent of Forest's business is from non residents, it's probably closer to 99%.
I have supported the CBA for years. They have been my voice. Im not in support of what most residents want, and not only because im a outfitter. I would be against it if i wasn't. To many people moving here wanting to change things.
Why would outfitters support res bowhunters when res bowhunters dont support them.
"bowhunters were a pain in the ass and didn't do anything to help with management objectives"
And yet we still complain to the CPW about everything......
Jethro, I did not over the past 2 weeks, but I have been an advocate for reduced tags for non-residents such as myself. I have contacted the CPW on numerous occasions and have also expressed concern on over grazing of land as well as the amount of erosion and loss of native grasses due to these concerns. At 58 years old and spending more than half of my life in Colorado, I feel like I have a pretty good understanding of what is going on in the state of Colorado. The CPW likes money. Residents didn't purchase enough archery elk tags to pay the light bill for the main office in Denver. They have a surplus of money because of nonresident tags. Be honest with yourself, do you think the CPW really gives a crap about a few thousand resident archery hunters @ 60 dollars a tag or 10's of thousands of non-resident tags @ 800.00. You guys are barking up the wrong tree. Putting the blame on and taking your frustrations out on nonresidents is not the smartest thing to be doing. We need each other to fight in unity. If the CPW said to residents, your price of tags has to go up by 5-fold to compensate for loss of revenue due to reducing nonresident tags, would residents accept it, cry about it or blame it on nonresidents? None the less, resident archery hunters whined and what they got isn't what they wanted so they are still whining. Resident hunters wanted more opportunity even if it meant for nonresidents to have no opportunity. Some were giddy about cutting the nonresident hunter out of the opportunity to hunt. They got greedy and thought that a few showing up at meetings would change things. Change isn't always good. Nonresidents aren't your problem; they are the excuse.
Look at wyo and Az nonres policies Colorado still not a bad deal
Wyoming still does just fine with allowing only around 7,000 nonresident elk hunters, while residents can hunt every year OTC bow, and then rifle on the same tag. At a Roundtable meeting ro discuss budgets and a projected future shortfall, I asked how Wyoming could make their model work while we can't. The intelligent, enlightening answer was, "We don't care what other states do".
"Why would outfitters support res bowhunters when res bowhunters dont support them." That's the point. Haskett is supposed to be a representative for Colorado "sportspersons and outfitters". We all know, and by your own admission, someone can't/won't be an impartial representative for both.
relichunter, "Nonresidents aren't your problem; they are the excuse." You couldn't be more wrong, but discussing over crowding to people like yourself is like talking to a wall, pointless! Your response is going to be the same no matter what. You are however right about one thing, CPW does care more about the non-resident money a little more than resident, but CPW also concerned with residents as we have a more political impact on most their actions, hence the change in license allocation this year. I wonder what your stance would be if Virginia started having a huge influx of non-resident hunters over crowding the residents in their perspective hunting areas?
I'm glad Forest publicly posted what is wrong with Outifitters and why one shouldn't be on the commission
Orion I don't agree with Forest on he wants as a final solution. But to say someone or a group is wrong (bad)because they support a different outcome is a shitty way to go about this.
I happen to want a different end to this than Forest. I know Forest, not well. I know he has been more generous than most with CBA and actually a decent person. Overall by all accounts he is an ok guy. Currently he is mad at our stance because it stands to make it harder for him and other outfitters to fill their hunts. Nothing wrong with that. Honestly the one issue I have with shutting off OTC for non residents is changing the rules made by government for outfitters. But that does over shadow the reason to do it IMO.
Point being resident hunters, non resident hunters, bowhunters, rifle hunters, outfitters we can all fight for our piece of the pie and should. Don't make it personal like a few of your are to Forrest and IMO he should own he looking out for his interests as an outfitter and not making personal about bowhunters. With all that said there are a lot of issue like the cat hunting ban we need to be friends on.
Point is nothing wrong being across the table from of our hunting brothers on an issue. Stay friends because there are more issues we are going to need to stick together on. The enemy in CO currently is Jared Polis and his boyfriend and those that share their views.
You guys want support from business owners when your tring to cut there business in half. Maybe more in some cases.
You guys dont want whats best for us. You want whats best for you.
Ryan Howard Are you a lifetime resident of Colorado. If not when did you move here?
Lifetime resident Forest born and raised in Colorado. How about you?
John the issue is the person on the commission who represents sportsmen as an outfitter continually votes against residents and resident hunting privileges in this state. They are trying to support their agenda and business by catering to non residents. Hey Forest what other western state is as friendly in tag allocations as Colorado? Amazingly all those outfits survive just fine with lower non resident tag allocations then Colorado
Orion- Haskett is there to represent the outfitter, that what she is supposed to do and the commission is step up that to have 1 person representing outfitters. Unfortunately she about the only left that is doing the original intent of the commission. From what I have seen Haskett problem the most or only reasonable person left on commission.
I do not agree with the way Haskett has been voting or things she has been presenting especially the shorter season she just recommended. Forest I guess your rebuttal has gone out the window since I'm not one of your hated transplants
On the Commmission website lists her as a "sportsman/outfitter" representative. Skiba was supposed to be our sportsman representative, but now we wait for another Polis appointee to surface.
I appreciate Forest's support of the CBA,and he seems like a good guy. And he is right - I don't give a hoot about outfitters in Colorado. If every one of them went out of business today it would only affect me, personally, in positive ways, just as reducing resident opportunity in favor of nonresidents affects outfitters in a positive way. I care about hunting opportunity for residents. Bottom line. Outfitters represent the antithesis of this desire.
I have hunted and will hunt other states, God willing. I have nothing against nonresident hunters, until they interfere, with my hunting to a point, I can't even hunt my home state, don't you agree??
We cant be just for resident hunters in your state. We need to be for hunters period.
"Lifetime resident Forest born and raised in Colorado. How about you?" For some reason i have a hard time believing that. I was born in Colorado. Grew up in New castle. Small town western slope. In my small town there were alot of businesses that wouldn't make it if nonresidents didn't come to hunt. Our little town would grow fron 200 to 4-500 people. Stores, gas stations, hotels,cafe,restaurants, taxidermy, bars,meat processing, mechanics, tow trucks lol, ect all would make alot of their Annual money during hunting season. Not just outfitters. What town did you grow up in? Im guessing you didn't see the same benefits. Colorado is changing for the bad. We need to fight to hold on to alitte bit of our Heritage and history. Colorado has been the state for hunters to bring the family west to experience the mountains and hunting for way longer than anyone on this thread has been alive.
Another note: comm Haskett proposed reducing the 4 rifle seasons to a "5-7-7-5" day scenario (2nd & 3rd rifle seasons= 7 days, instead of 9 as cpw recommends). This basically cuts folks who can only hunt weekends due to school or work committments by 50% by limiting those seasons to 1 weekend instead of 2 weekends. That oughtta help hunter recruitment.
I'm in the retail side of the hunting industry now, and the whole comments about non residents supporting local businesses...WOW!!!
This ain't the 80's or the 90's. Non resident hunters do not eat at the local resturuants, don't stay in the motels or hotels, and 80% of the food is brought with them from their home. They don't shop the local shops. Skiers bring more into these businesses then the non resident hunters do. So the days of non resident hunters bring monies into the businesses was oner in the late 90's.
The shop I work in sells the highest amount of tags per, according to CPW. In 2019 and 2020, we sold over 3,000 tags to non residents bowhunters each year. And we only get 3% of each license sold. That don't even cover the guys wages when he could of been doing something else. Supporting the local businesses... Thats a JOKE!!! Think about it, over 3,000 non resident bowhunters compared to the 60 or 80 local bowhunters. And yet the resident bowhunters are the reasons things are the way they are now... ??
How big is outfitting in Colorado today? One outfitter is booked solid on his drop camps till 2026!! In 2023, he had over 60 non resident bowhunters in his drop camps. And not one bowhunter killed an elk, very few heard or seen elk. So now you know why outfitters don't support resident hunters... It's funny how all of a sudden the CBA is so concerned about loosing the otc resident tags, but yet they did nothing or said nothing when everything happened hear in southwest Colorado. Steve, aka Grasshopper, didn't know how bad the situation was down here until i brought it to his attention last summer. Where was our support? OTC units are gone. Accept it, and welcome to being able to hunt elk in our own state every 2 to 3 years...
I grew up in Bayfield in the southwest corner and yeah we benefitted tons from non resident hunters, still do to some extent. Sorry, but OTC hunting isn't sustainable anymore and resident opportunities should not get the shaft to cater to non residents. The resource is more important than businesses making a profit. Our town has also grown exponentially so people aren't as reliant on hunting season as they were in the 80s and 90s. Your kinda stuck in the past with that logic no town on the western slope is the same as it was. For better or worse, it is what it is and it was inevitable. Again, I don't care what you believe. You also dodged my question what other western state is as generous as Colorado when it comes to nonresident license allocations?
For the guys "wanting to be like other western states". Why don't you start by slashing your elk herd by 60%-70% to get close to the elk population of one of the 3 states that border you.
^^^^ That’s funny. The wolves will be doing just that.
Oh looky another non resident whining that he is losing opportunity when we still have OTC tags, 25% non resident allocation on draw tags, and 20% allocation on high demand tags. Maybe you should worry about that deer decline going on in Kansas
Buglmin, that shop you work in must pay its employees very, very well.
Wrong. Not whining one bit. I was for the new quota allocation. And don't even mind if residents get to keep OTC. But the residents of Colorado will never be happy until they get the tag they want, when they want. And had better not see another hunter in the woods.
Don't worry though. It's not just a Colorado thing. Our Ks residents do the exact same thing.
My point is that every state is different. And shouldn't be too worried about what other states do. Its that way with everything in life. If you only worry about doing what other people are doing its very rarely the best thing. They need to find a good balance for NR and R for their own state
Exactly, but when non residents whine about their allocations here it's ridiculous.
I agree. But from my observations I mainly hear residents gripe about their allocations because "they want to be like other western states". For the most part NR are were happy with the old allocations. Or dont mind the new allocations either. The nonresident really don't gripe until the residents want to keep slashing the allocations "because other western states". See my issue??
There really isn't an answer. There are just too many people both resident and non resident. Not to even mention the influx of hikers, bikers, leaf watchers, etc. that have moved here and stress the wildlife. They ignore winter closures, have their dogs off leashes, etc. etc. Let's not even get into the influx of the razor crowd and their damages. I think a lot of people hang on to the past, heck even I do it. I remember my dad and I going out and being the only truck in the parking lot or trailhead. Those days are long gone, but I think some are wanting to get that back in some form or another. OTC is not sustainable and I think everyone resident and non resident agrees with that for the most part.
"You also dodged my question what other western state is as generous as Colorado when it comes to nonresident license allocations?" We have 3x the elk they do.
100% agree. Ks residents want to hold onto the 1980's and 1990's of Ks deer hunting. We aren't EVER going to get that back. Just like Colorado isn't ever going back to those years of elk hunting. Residents and NR need to except that and find a way to be happy hunting what we currently have
The problem with "sticking together" is nonresidents can't vote against ballot initiatives. That is where it will be lost, by vote.
If we had 25 percent of Colorado residents hunting, we would be fine. Unfortunately, we recruited nonresident, nonvoters instead.
Forest simple question do you advocate for more or less resident opportunities?
KC. ---"Not to worry about what other states are doing"! There is no "worry" but just the facts that elk states that surround Colorado have given top priority to their residents and reduced the number of nonresidents who can apply. This fact,"worry" is now CPW allows hundreds of nonresident elk hunters to pile into Colorado causing the over crowding issue. It is time, (should have happened years ago) for CPW to realize this and adjust the numbers, down, of non residents who want to hunt elk in Colorado.
This should be more of a Social Science Crowding issue, than a game management issue or a funding issue but of course, $$$$$$$$ will always raise its ugly head.
Or how about leaving the opportunity the same?
I advocate for more hunting opportunities period. In ever state in every country. I belive hunting is a right and should be recognized as such by every state. Im for hunting as a whole, not just whats best for me.
Leave it the same? so you think OTC is sustainable?
Forest I get that but if you had to vote for one or the other, which is happening which way are you voting?
Im always voting for more hunting opportunities. I dont believe taking opportunities from one group so a different group has more helps hunting as a whole.
Your non response says it all. The same number of tags are getting issued they are adjusting the allocations to favor residents.
Forest states "I advocate for more hunting opportunities period. In ever state in every country. I belive hunting is a right and should be recognized as such by every state. Im for hunting as a whole, not just whats best for me."
Well, hunting is NOT A RIGHT, but a privilege, a privilege allowed by the states for the residents and nonresidents. The states have the assigned "right" though hunting regulations, who can be allowed who can hunt and when.
The State's wildlife are held in the Public Trust for it citizens and for it's "visitors" and it will be up to the Commission to decide the fairness and preference of one group over the other. Our point here in Colorado and in many other states, the Citizens of that state should have the top priority and that, in this case of Colorado OTC elk license, residents should maintain OTC licenses and nonresidents should not, while still having the opportunity to hunt elk in Colorado, their elk license should be in an all draw system thus reducing their numbers, thus reducing the Social Issue of "crowding".
HUNTING, has never been a right in modern times.
Its been voted in as a right in 23 states. It should be our goal to make it 50. Paul i respect you very much and always have. I fully believe hunting is and should be considered by every hunter a right.
Hunting is the most basic human right of them all. I believe God given.
Please explain what a "right to hunt" in the state constitution would accomplish, besides making hunters feel good? A one day season on squirrels will satisfy it, and it will have absolutely no effect on increasing (or maintaining) hunting opportunity for residents.
Several attempts have been made by REPUBLICANS to get a right to hunt and fish bill passed, but always blocked by DEMOCRAT SCUM in the legislative committees.
a right would legally be harder to take than a privilege. Anti hunters wont stop untill hunting is stoped. The states that passed the right to hunt and fish are telling them you will not take hunting and fishing from us. Ever. I believe i have the right to hunt anyway. If things got so bad that i had no other choice but to exercise my right to hunt im sure most laws would be out the window anyway. Im going to kill something to eat before starvation. Thats my God given right.
Understood, and a law won't change that. They may not be able to take all hunting away, but they can chip away one species and method at a time. A better law would be one which exempts all wildlife management issues from ballot referendums.
The non residents are buying up all of your land too. Mostly liberals and the hate hunters.
I see signs in many areas of larimer county (front range liberal county) saying it is a "right to farm county" does that mean that any anti AG, anti ranching, anti corporate farming group (all of which are the same groups that oppose hunting) will push for having a garden in your back yard will satisfy the legislative "right" to farm and make all the farmers and ranchers leave so they can consume all the water rights and land for urban sprawl and further Californication? I don't think it works like that.
You might do a little research on the "right to farm" law in Colorado. It means that if a developer puts in a subdivision next to an existing pig farm, new residents can't try to shut the pig farm down. That's all.
Meanwhile, this is the typical wording of a "right to hunt and fish" law: "The citizens of this State have the right to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife, including the use of traditional methods, subject only to statutes enacted by the Legislature and regulations adopted by the designated agency [or “fish and game commission” or state-specific term] to promote wildlife conservation and management and to preserve the future of hunting and fishing. Public hunting and fishing shall be a preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife."
So nothing is guaranteed because the legislature or the Commission could simply ban bear hunting, mountain lion hunting, or bowhunting for that matter.
The term "wildlife conservation" is now very tricky, because the new woke meaning is "compassionate conservation". That minimizes the role of hunting in wildlife management, is the antithesis of the NAMWC, and appears to be the path on which our current PWC is heading.
And yet lots of bowhunters in Colorado vote democratic. Im starting to put together that a lot of our bowhunting voice for the last bunch of years has been democratic or liberal minded. Guys that are voting for dems who hate hunting are our hunting voice.
Oh ok Gotcha. That sounds about right (pardon the pun as another one of my balloons pops)
Yep and Ziek is the biggest democratic supporter ever. He's been MIA on these threads since these new commissioners got appointed. Kinda hard to defend it I guess
I was a resident of Colorado for a lot of years and recently became a nonresident. The way things are going, I am not sure I want to keep supporting the CPw.
I went to a lot of commissioners meetings, sportsman’s round table, and special meetings with the DOW and CPw over the years. It always seemed that they would pick the more complex way to go that was not the best for the state’s wildlife most of the time. It made me ill seeing what they did to archery season, OTC elk, mule deer, and finally wolves. OTC archery elk hunting has been getting worse every year and I was questioning the value of the last several resident OTC archery tags that I had. Absolutely horrible near where I lived in Routt County.
I will only consider high quality hunts in Colorado moving forward and may not get many more tags in that state. Might even drop out of applying for several species that I’ve killed plenty of over the years in Colorado. I’m totally OK with that.
