Colorado land owner vouchers
Elk
So the question might be is, if all archery and rifle licenses for elk, deer, bear, and pronghorn go to all draw, that would mean that the land owner vouchers would apply to all of the Draw units statewide and qualified landowners can get (west of 1-25) 10% off the top? Currently, OTC units do not allow landowner vouchers. What affect this might have on future license allocation is only a guess. Any one have an answer?
Quota Pool Allocation: Land owner preference: Deer, Elk, and Pronghorn are the only species eligible for landowner preference. Landowner preference is only available in a Game Management Unit (GMU) that is totally limited for ALL rifle licenses for the eligible species.
This means: If you are able to purchase an over-the-counter license for ANY rifle season for the GMU, there is no landowner preference for that species.
For a species that is eligible for landowner preference in a GMU, quota will be allocated by hunt code according to the following table:
For all Game Management Units west of I-25:
General Quota Pool: 10% of all general public quota may be issued as a voucher that is valid for the specific hunt code Restricted Quota Pool: 10% of all general public quota may be issued as a voucher that is valid for the specific hunt code AND is restricted to Private-Land-Only For all Game Management Units east of I-25:
General Quota Pool: 15% of all general public quota may be issued as a voucher that is valid for the specific hunt code Restricted Quota Pool: 10% of all general public quota may be issued as a voucher that is valid for the specific hunt code AND is restricted to Private-Land-Only AND may only be transferred to an immediate family member* or youth** * Immediate Family is defined in the Definitions section. ?** Youth means a person 12 to 17 years old who is an eligible hunter. ??
Application Allocation: Registered landowners for the LPP will receive a number of applications based upon the number of deeded acres owned and properly registered. Applications will be allocated according to the following acreage tier table:
?Registered Acres ?Number of applications 160 to 639 acres 1 application 640 to 1239 acres 1 application and 1 Private-Land-Only application* 1240 to 1839 acres 2 applications 1840 to 2439 acres 3 applications 2440 to 3039 acres 4 applications 3040 to 3639 acres 5 applications 3640 to 4239 acres 6 applications 4240 to 4839 acres 7 applications 4840 to 5439 acres 8 applications 5440 to 6039 acres 9 applications 6040 to 6639 acres 10 applications 6640 to 7239 acres 11 applications 7240 to 7839 acres 12 applications 7840 to 8439 acres 13 applications 8440 to 9039 acres 14 applications 9040 to 9639 acres 15 applications 9640 to 10239 acres 16 applications 10240 to 10839 acres 17 applications 10840 to 11439 acres 18 applications 11440 or more acres 19 applications
* 1 Private-Land-Only application means: If this application is successfully drawn for a voucher, the voucher issued will automatically be restricted to Private-Land-Only.
Note: Only the acreage tier 640 to 1239 receives an application that is automatically restricted to Private-Land-Only.
The 20% of transferable elk tags west of I-25 will be valuable. Likely outcome would be landowners/outfitters looking to increase that number.
The initial push for landowner tags was successful and the push to increase them to current levels was successful so...
well there has to be good land owner relations with CPW policy. they realize the herds typically winter on these properties. Good for the animals and easy on the departments budget. On the other side, many of the landowners depend upon the income they receive from selling hunts on their place. Take away their hunters and they cant make a living.
I remember when RFW started - for the same reasons
I have no issue with the CPW working with land owners but CPW often greatly under values our tags they give away vs what the public gets back.
It's turned into a subsidy for leasing and outfitting businesses in many cases.
For the next bgss, if residents retained otc licenses, and nonresidents were capped, landowner vouchers would not be instituted. (Per Jeff ver steeg).
Clue: Seems like a simple way to keep 20 percent of the quota in the public draw.
FYI. It also really simple as a landowner to get a bigger slice of the landowner pool. If you own 640, you split it into 4 160 acres tracts and title each one in separate entities. Each 160 gets its own app, with a 1st through 4th choice, and 3 leftover options. One app can get 4 licenses, if demand is low.
In this scenario, it is possible that none of the licenses are restricted to private lands only.
Ease up, you don't understand how it works here. Vouchers are unit-wide, not for the land owned, and they are brokered by middlemen. Permission to hunt the ranch is supposed to come with the tag by law, but often animals aren't on those ranches during hunting season, or purchasers are told outright that they have to hunt somewhere else. Many of the bigger ranches, eligible for 19 vouchers for each species, are owned by super-wealthy out of state investors or big corporations. Those tags come off the top of the allocation, and residents lose opportunity so brokers and outfitters can sell them to nonresidents. It's a moneymaking racket on several levels that hurts resident hunters. That's why we have such a hardon about it.
But wait, I thought 2nd party "brokering' in Colorado was illegal!
If I understand it correctly. The landowner vouchers come off of the top of the Tag allotment. Correct? They don't come out of the residents percentage or the non residents percentage tags?
Correct. But the majority are sold to NRs, so they are effectively NR tags.
Paul, our Dem representative actually told me there is "no evidence of third party brokering" of landowner vouchers. I told her to Google "landowner vouchers". Never heard back.
So anyone wanting to get a tag through the draw like the majority of people do. The landowner vouchers take tags away from them equally percentage wise. So it affects non residents the exact same amount that it does residents.
Not exactly. If there are 10 landowner tags carved off the top, 7 or 8 of those would have been available to residents in the public draw due to the 65%-80% resident allocation. 2 or 3 would have been available to nonresidents.
It affects public draw nonresidents more then residents at 80/20 residents get 60 percent of the quota nonresidents get 16 percent.
Lou the 20 percent is split, 10 percent public land 10 percent private. On the app a landowner must opt out or they get a plo tag
Glunt. You are correct. I did not think of that. If there are 10 land owner tags available and residents would have got 8 of them they would get 80% and non residents 20% but if they only give residents 7 Then it would be a 70/30 split. Depends on who they gave that odd number tag to. Residents would either get a little bigger piece of the pie or the non residents. I don't know how they would or how they do split that up when it's a small number like that
I dont recall how they split when tags fall in between round numbers. I think I remember it favors residents. In a unit that only takes a few points residents get 65% so I used 7 tags in my example.
They round down for each of the two separate 10% portions of LO voucher allocation. And round down for the NR ceiling percentage.
Steve, I was referring to LO tags in deer units that are all private land.
