NR opportunity.....or lack of
Elk
Just throwing this out there but has anyone spoke with CPW about the reduction of tags for NRs in certain units. For clarification, I see where one unit dropped the percentage of tags allotted for NRs. They dropped 10 percent down to a 25 % allotment. I ain't no dummy, that's not 10%. That's a third reduction in tags making that unit now requiring 2 possibly 3 preferences point when it was only 1 a year ago. It seems CPW is making it harder and harder for NRs to draw decent units. Its already hard enough. People are having to resort to adding preference points to their infant children to give them a opportunity one day. If they end up being hunters. NRs hunters are flipping the bill for the CPW budget without question.
Your about to get flogged!
But yes, you are correct. A 10% reduction in overall tag allotment took away almost 1/3 of NR tags
@mountaincreek, CPW had little choice but to reduce tags. The place is over run with hunters…don’t you think they HAD to do something?
CPW was trying to be everything to every Hunter for a long time. With all of the other states restricting Access, Colorado just kept getting worse and worse as it was pretty much one of the only games in town you could just drive over and buy a tag.
I think they finally realized that they just cannot do that anymore.
If you think it’s bad now, wait till the wolves start taking their share of game.
Someone hasn’t been paying attention ;)
Folks keep complaining about the loss of opportunity but I've yet to see one state they would not be applying so their kids will have better odds. Don't hunt CO much but I agree with limiting NR licenses and trying to reduce crowding.
I’m not sure why anyone would complain about a reduction in tags in Colorado. The overcrowding was so bad that I vowed to never go back. Reduce the pressure by 25% or even half and I would be glad to hunt there again even if I had to wait 5 years. The good thing is nothing is keeping you from hiking around with the hoards of people even if you don’t have a tag. Your odds of killing an elk is only slightly worse hiking without a bow vs having an unlimited OTC tag.
I agree with CNelk. Someone hasn’t been paying attention.
As a NR I was great full Colorado gave 35% to begin with. That is a huge percentage of tags going to NR hunters compared to what the other states give.
If a unit has 100 tags and 35% went to NR that would be 35 tags. Now that they drop it down 10% that would put it at 25% - 25 tags. That’s a 10 tag difference. A 1/3 of the 35 tags is 11.55 tags. So yeah it would reduce it almost a third.
I haven't looked up all the info. But did the total tags go down? Or was it just the same amount of tags with more going to residents? And I am not talking about the units with reductions because of bad winter kill.
KsRancher - here are the 2024 tags quotas compared to 2023 - see link
Thats what I thought might be the case. Pretty well the same number of hunters. So crowding will be that same. Just traded a few NR for R.
Mountain creek - what if you could not hunt your own state because it has more non residents hunting than residents?
You must have had a very long nap mountaincreek! You should change your user name to Rip Van Winkle
Hang on while I get a tissue.
Ok, that's better. Now let's talk about nonresident elk opportunity in all the other western states.
"Just traded a few 'thousand' NRs for Rs". There, I fixed it. ;-)
I apply in CO, but do not live in CO. I absolutely understand why CPW would make this change to come more in line with what every other state does and I'm grateful for how generous they've been in the past as I've hunted elk and deer in CO multiple times.
Is it a bummer? Yes. But it is righteous? Yes. A state should look out for its residents first. And 10% is pretty much the going-rate for NR allotment across the West.
look I get it. You don't like NR hunters. But to say that the reduction was because of overcrowding is just not so. There are still the same amount of tags, In fact us NRs are gonna come in for 5,8,10 days and leave! Now the way it is, that's a ton more resident hunters stomping around for the entire month. You RH might just be shocked at the difference. CPW didn't change anything and in fact they increased the pressure and over crowding because you guys can hunt every weekend and can stay for way longer and that's fine. But when you blow smoke up my butt saying "well we needed to give more to the residents or well we needed to do it for the herd" is talking out of both sides of the mouth. Yes I am griping, but when you look at the numbers, the our tags across the entire state are undoubtedly going to climb even higher cause the NR flip the bill for the state. No denying that. Not sure just how many units shifted the percentages but that's a crap ton of revenue lost for the state.
Feels like this was approved almost a year ago. Nobody ever said the quota change was due to over crowding (except a few posters in this thread, and they're mistaken). Nobody ever said it was for the herd. Residents wanted more of the LQ tags and they got it. Can complain if you want, but its certainly an understandable desire. 35% to NR is crazy high.
Rest assured the state didn't lose a crap ton of revenue. They just raised the NR cost:-)
They sure will.
3 options 1. wait for your dream tag 2. hire an outfitting company
3. ooooooorrrrrrrrrr........move to CO........................crickets
" But to say that the reduction was because of overcrowding is just not so."
Pay attention to the meetings, would you? We have been talking about totally doing away with OTC licenses for a year....because of crowding.
They reduced tags in the flat tops by hundreds...becuase of crowding complaints.
Unit 80/81 went from 3200 OTC archers to 2,000 limited archers due to crowding where now that it is limited 75% percent of the draw tags...are drawn by nonresidents.
We lost OTC on the Grand Mesa, because of crowding complaints. I quit hunting there decades ago, because it was too crowded.
I could go on, but Id be wasting time. You are way uninformed. Get informed.
Colorado should limit all NR tags. 25% is being very generous for NR tags. Look at all the other western states and find a better option…
Steve, I think I saw a recent post of your’s elsewhere talking about the percentage of tags in some of the former OTC units going to NR. What are your remedies to that situation? I didn’t see many solutions offered up. Seems like it will become a bigger issue as NR OTC is done away with entirely. If residents don’t want those tags bad enough to apply first choice what can be done without cutting the departments throat by capping NR quotas? Seems to me a lot of this would shake out naturally if Colorado would simply confiscate points anytime someone acquires a bull tag. Trying to build points but missing out on a preferred backup tag isn’t something I have a ton of sympathy for I guess. Seems like you’d be punishing NR’s AND the department so resident hunters can have their cake and eat it too?
Hey, I just looked at the WY forum and don't see you complaining there, even though NRs only get 16% of the total elk tags. And they don't have outfitter vouchers you can buy so you can hunt every year.
How about this - Name one western state that is more generous with NR elk hunting opportunity. Just one. I'll wait.
+2 Jaquomo & Treeline.
Colorado has always been the back up state for those who don't draw else where, and or the easy state to get to hunt elk every year with generous OTC elk tags. Colorado desperately needs to limit NR tags across the board.
The only way to increase resident tags is to reduce non-resident tags. Either that or you are issuing tags based on the desire of people to hunt vs. management objectives.
Also....since we are all airing our grievances....I think it is unfair that T-roy won't will his Iowa ground to me.
They needed to protect their residents now that all these other states have reintroduced wolves and game numbers have plummeted....Oh wait
not sure about T-roy and Iowa but about the generosity of CO. I highly doubt I can name another state that is as generous for NR's simply because CO has the largest Elk population. I guess I am just stating the obvious. Hunting is general is getting harder and harder. Mainly because of youtube and SM. I love hunting, Have all my life. Except for while I was an infant. Not only is it getting harder, the price of hunting is about getting stupid. 117 per year just for a preference point for a small game license I will NEVER use! That's extortion. My daddy always said son, don't bite the hand that feeds you. Well us NRs are feeding the state booo coose of dollars and if it weren't for us, then you in state ers would have some pretty high dollar tags. A rich mans game its getting for us NR's
Whaaaa stay home and hunt there. We will be just fine without NR money!
Yep, Colorado did the right thing by reducing the allotted NR tags. Our wildlife management should not be based off how much revenue we do or do not receive. As a resident here I expect the CPW to put its residents first. We live here, pay taxes here, have businesses here, contribute to this economy 10 fold compared to a guy buying a $700 tag and staying for a week or so. Having a 75/25 split is still way more than any other western state offers so I’m not shedding tears for non residents. I’m also a non resident in 49 other states and don’t expect them to give me anywhere near the opportunity as the folks who live there. Don’t like it, move here. We also need badly to stop offering OTC tags for non residents. The overcrowding is unbearable
Mountaincreek, my suggestion is that you teach Colorado a lesson, stop applying here, and apply for the other western states. Wyoming is easy to figure out - buy five preference points and hunt every six years, or pay $2000 plus the license cost, plus the cost of three PPs, and get into the Special to hunt every four years.
Somehow WY is able to use this model while allowing every resident to hunt elk every year, for cheap. Is it fair for NRs to have to do this and pay all that money? Do WY resident hunters care that I can only hunt there once every 4-6 years for beaucoup NR fees? Nope. Get over it. Demand is outstripping supply, and you can still hunt in your state every year, for cheap.
Guess what, more changes coming it looks like : https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Commission/2024/May/Item.19BGSS_Policy_Draft.pdf
Funny to see this play out about CO, Jac. you leave Wyoming out of this one, lol !!
NR saying they are the ones "paying the bills" for CDOW and keeping the lights on for small businesses with their purchases holds about as much water as R saying "look at every other western state".
The NR aren't keeping the lights on. States can get by with WAY less NR hunters like Jaq mentioned above. But on the other hand Colorado isn't like "every other western state". So shouldn't be managed like every other western state. No one (NR or R) will be happy until they can get "their" tag every year.
Me personally am tickled if me or my boys can hunt elk/deer/lope every year in CO. Even if it means onlyone of us get a tag every year. But I will take it like it is where we can each get a tag every year. Just like every Co resident can do. Yes, it may not be in the area you want to. But you can hunt bull elk every year and still keep getting points. I personally don't see how that is a problem. And I know it's not "how it used to be". But it won't ever be like it used to be. Kansas deer is no different, it's NEVER going to be like it was in the 90's
Well gee, guess I'll just become a vegan in despair. Just no hope.
Well wait; I don't have to do that til next year.
I moved to Alaska in large part so that I could be an Alaska resident and reap the benefits of being a resident in this state. I get to hunt sheep every year for just the cost of a hunting license. If you wanted to do that, you'd be shelling out about 20 grand per year to an outfitter - now we're talking BooooCoooo bucks. There's more hunters than there are animals and states get to decide how to divvy them up to the residents of their state and how much of a bone they will throw to NRs.
If you want to live where you grew up, you have to deal with the scraps that the other 49 states give you and the prices they charge. CO still fields more NR hunters than any other state and their prices are still lower than most. In most states, a NR elk tag costs $1200+.
Look, everyone here is empathetic to your point that less opportunity sucks. Everyone wishes that everyone could hunt whatever they wanted to every year. But demand is higher than supply so something has to give.
And CO went from being far more generous than any other state to the NR to just being more generous, which is why you're not hearing a lot of sympathy about the actual change in policy.
It's NOT RIGHT that NR's have to pay such a high price to hunt elk when wolves get to hunt them for free! Wolves need to "pay their fare share!" -- Joe Biden
Especially because the wolves are NRs too...
Well, final staff recommendations were released today, and they flipped. They are now recommending retention of OTC archery elk for residents, while limiting NRs. Sort of like Wyoming. I guess my statement above was prescient! Wow. They never reverse course this late in the process!
Holy smokes! Good deal Lou. But what are Co resident bowhunters going to bitch about next :)
“But what are Co resident bowhunters going to bitch about next :)“
Next we’re going to push for an all out ban on Kansas residents hunting here. ;^)
“But what are Co resident bowhunters going to bitch about next :)“
Here’s a couple - residents need the 75:25 ratio on all 4 Choices.
Residents need first chance at Leftover Licenses
I got no problem with the reduction in NR allocation from 35% down to 25%. Still that doesn't make the impact on NR point creep any less shocking. Just thankful that I burned 14 elk points in 2020 on a good archery hunt in the nick of time. This year that same hunt took 24 points to guarantee a NR to draw, with no change in total license quota, and after the cut to 25% NR max. It takes about 4 years to move forward 1 NR point with creep, meaning my point pool had 40 years added to their wait for that license. That's serious point leap, not just creep. Just how it is. More and more it's looking like the new reality for quality out-of-state hunting is to either 1) move to a western state, 2) buy your way in (LO tags, auction tags, res tags, etc), or 3) forget the dream.
Thank your favorite YouTube hunting influencer for the needed reduction :) keep watching them though, they’re tooootally not bad for hunt opportunity and quality (despite increasing point creep and pressure for low point units exponentially) and they’re tooootally not market hunters (despite deriving income from the killing of wildlife and plastering commercialized products all over the carcasses of dead animals)
Holy smokes! I was being a smart ass. I should have known better. Like I said, Colorado resident bowhunters won't be happy until they get every tag in the state. Nonresidents get behind them when it comes to cutting our own tags in LE units and even doing away with OTC for NR.
AND IT STILL ISN'T ENOUGH!
Oh ya, I forgot. "But every other western state"
All valid points. thanks for the input. I wonder what it will look like in 30/40 years. I have seen so much change in the last 5/10 years. NR wont have a chance in any state. without winning a lottery. Like in lottery, I mean the Mega Million Powerball. That may be a little gloom and doom, but that's what I see in the horizon.
Put lets keep on filming and pushing products........the American Dream. Whoever said the wolf thing: Joe Biden. pretty comical
20
“But what are Co resident bowhunters going to bitch about next :)“
Overcrowding. That’s not going to change.
I will give my opinion. I think a 75/25 or 80/20 split is reasonable. And let's say 10% taken off the top for R and NR youth. But if they try to give residents and nonresidents tags and they don't put them as 1st choice then it should go to 1st choice (like the way it currently is). Secondary and leftover go 100% random.
“Here’s a couple - residents need the 75:25 ratio on all 4 Choices.”
i.e. - “I want to build points AND get the 0 point LQ tag I desire every year.”
Like KSRancher said, talk about nothing being good enough. No problem here at all with the changes so far - 80/20, 75/25, lowering quotas, etc. I’m all for residents improving their situation within reason. But as I mentioned above, gaining points while thinking you’re entitled to a lower choice hunt before a NR who’s willing to apply first choice and pay 12x is pretty bush league. If you want that tag bad enough you’re guaranteed to draw it first choice. Holding NR’s/the department hostage so you can build points AND grab a hunt you prefer doesn’t hold water. Further your scenario inflates the number of 80/20 units over time as it would be even easier to hoard points for residents and affect creep. It would also mean less NR pull first choice tags, meaning more points in the NR system. And at the end of the day after the leftover program shakes out the vast majority of those tags are going to wind up in NR hands anyway! Terrible idea.
I have lived in CO since the 70's. This year I applied for 6 licenses and only drew 1. Only drew that one (elk) because I didnt last year and had a point. Not some great unit. Below average success, terrible beetle kill blowdown and access still screwed up from a fire a few years ago. Some of the other tags are ones I have been trying to get for decades and may never draw before I'm pushing daisys.
Even with the change in NR allocations here, NR still get about 1/2 the tags. Many hunt codes take 20% of the tags off the top for land owners before the public draw. Many of those are sold to NR. We also still have OTC elk with no limit on how many NR can hunt here. Usually 1/2 or more of those are NR.
These are the good old days for NR even if it may not feel like it. The way CO is going, I'm not sure if I have grandkids that they will have much hunting opportunity.
Well as i see it..... Residents are good with paying $400 plus for a elk tag to make up the loss of tag revenue from non residents because it is about the money or non residents wouldn't pay more. You wont be over crowded by the 100% of tags in your unit hunting the whole season. So now your happy seeing all your 86437 tags given to residents paying 5 times what you do now to not see a non resident but all residents with the same or more amount hunting pressure than before. Yet wait. You hunt for a month and have more opportunities will result in more kills which will result in less tags given the next year and who will you blame next??? Typical democratic state!!!
And to all you resident hunter on here....... if you know it all.... got this all figured out ...... why the hell aint you working for CWP and fixing the problem??? Typical democratic politics it seems!! Got a fix for everything!! BLAME SOMEONE ELSE!!
I'm going to identify as a wolf next year and hunt elk for free. I'm sure Colorado will welcome us furbies. Gotta be inclusive and equitable to us diverse folks.
ok I will answer your question. Make it 20 % but keep it simple to maintain your points and play the system. The small game license requirement to be eligible to purchase a preference point only to recoup federal dollars from the Dingle and Johnson act just seems to me that its a runaway train. There is no stopping the bleeding. Say we want to hunt a decent unit. And put in for say 13 years. and at 117 a pop plus inflation and fees and the increased tag cost at that time, you could wind up with a close to 3000 dollar tag for a so so unit. Before you even fuel up the truck. It's plum crazy. I will say it, I don't know what the answer is. Some of you guys act is if you have got it figured out easily? Hunters are coming out of the wood work. That's whos fault? And if I am not mistaken, I am pretty sure if you happen to miss a year in the 13 year span (preference points) you lose them. I know MT is that way. I lost 2 back in 2020.
PPs in Colorado last for 10 years without applying
If the cuts happen then tags prices will take a huge jump or they will start issuing more tags again. The bottom line is the revenue that it creates for a stupid liberal state. CO runs its wildlife about as smart as my liberal state of IL. No need for quality game management we have to create revenue for them to make stupid decisions on how to spend it. Just my opinion.
Shane
Apparently you didn't read very well. KB and I think it's good like it is, even with NR losing OTC archery. What bothers us is the resident bowhunters don't want to stop there. Your post for example 90/10.
Nonrestakinurtags- As a resident in CO I'll gladly pay $400 for an elk tag in a limited unit with no non-residents if the tag numbers were reduced by the amount of non-residents that were hunting it.
I pay $400 for NonRes Wyo deer tag and never bat an eye.
Good! Colorado is late to the game but putting resident hunters first is important in any state. If they’d have done this years ago the state might have attracted a few hunters instead of hippies and east/west coast money
Bottom line is if you want to hunt elk every year pack up and move out west. If you don’t want to do that then play the game. IMO residents should always get the majority of the tags.
After 62 years of being a Co native and seeing the handwriting on the wall years before that I loaded up the truck and moved to “Beverly”, no swimming pools or movie stars, instead general tags and a resident friendly state! I did have a pretty good run in Co. but the future is bright as ever.
Colorado is a beautiful state and I have no remorse about leaving when the opportunity presented itself and I’m not looking back. Still a few points in the hopper but only for a premium tag.
I certainly feel for the Colorado resident bow hunters who have to play the roulette wheel every year to follow their passion. Personally I think it should be 100% draw for non residents across the board, period. A 80 / 20 split is more than fair especially for all rifle tags.
The cheapest way to hunt Colorado elk is to live somewhere else like the midwest or south. This place is expensive.
^^^ Exactly. High property taxes, high car insurance rates, high home owners insurance, high traffic volume and weed dispensers.
But if any NonRes is interested in moving to Colorado, the first $750k will buy my place. You can shoot your bow 50+yds in the yard, 2 gardens, have a barn to store your atvs along with a 3 BR ranch style house. I’ll even toss in the chicken coop.
Many states a guy can buy their own whitetail and turkey property with a pond, shop and a house for less than that. I drive 2.5 hours to hunt whitetails on well-used public.
As a CO NR, I'm all for NRs going on a draw for all elk and a corresponding cut in tags so that we're 20% or less than the residents. I'd rather hunt CO once every 20 years and have a quality hunt than the current shame that is 1/2 the state with 90:10 cow:bull ratios and the average herd bull being a 3-year-old 220 inch 5x5.
It's not natural and once you've hunted a real unit where elk don't live in these artificial matriarchal colonies like cattle, it opens your eyes to what a sham CO elk hunting really is.
While I'm dreaming, can we change 1st rifle season to ML season, completely eliminate 3rd rifle season, and cut 4th rifle tags by 50% or more?
Tags should go to locals first. I agree with that. How is the state going in general? My friends sons are union trades, getting sent out there for Federal contracts, local services can't pass the drug tests....... Legalization of weed is a poor overall business decision, yet more states are getting it.
I agree with the residents having priority as well but I do have a question Ike - how is changing the ratio of Res/NR going to make for better bull to cow ratio and more mature bulls? Only way I see that happening is if they cut the total number of tags not just reallocate who gets what - I don’t see reallocating the NR tags to Res tags doing anything for the herd. Matter of fact that may make for even more crowding as the residents have an easier time to hunt the entire archery season, not just a week or two.
The non residents help fuel your economy.
“While I'm dreaming, can we change 1st rifle season to ML season, completely eliminate 3rd rifle season, and cut 4th rifle tags by 50% or more?“
Sounds like something that could happen soon if the CBA would get behind some change
Residents fuel it all year long not just in Fall, lol.
They will raise the NR price and folks will pay it, no loss of revenue to small towns like chicken little predicts. Not any specific chicken little on here just all the chickens in general.
I used my last deer points for CO 4th season this year. I wont be buying points there again. And i havent elk hunt CO since 2013, nor have i bought points since 2020 there. Lost what i had accumulated since i drew a tag and turned it in for refund. I wont be contributing to the overcrowding at least. This may be my last year elk hunting ever, once we finish archery in Wyoming this September. Unless i draw a random tag in Wy or NM in the next 3-5 years. Not sure I will even bother to elk hunt after that point. I have other hunting plans i need to accomplish too.
Ok ok i see your good with paying $400 but you wanna now reduce the tags because you know the nonresident tags number will be replaced with resident hunting more and even more pressure. I get it. Get rid of us. Then your happy..... until some dope smoking hippie is camped in your favorite spot! Oh and that hiker that screws your hunt up or that mountain biker!!! I get it you dont like us but end of the day its public land. Hunter should be sticking together for better access and opportunities. Its been proven by the state of Colorado that recreational users are hurting the population more than nonresident hunter. I think we all should be wanting to limit public access during breeding season and calving season more than they do now! The outfitter association will love residents wanting to do away with nonresident!! I know yall are a great source of income for those guy! Helps boost the ol economy. Why dont yall wanna come hunt in the east??? Oh its because we only have deer and bear! Very few turkeys. Nope no mule deer either! No mountain lions at all! Sasquatch maybe! Im just saying that if we have the same opportunity for all the big game animals in the east then we wouldnt be out west!
To your point of moving..... its so easy to relocate because we dont have families or careers!! If we all relocated to Colorado or any western state you would still bitch about the non locals moving in and taking over!! Period!!
I did relocate. from Cortez to the UP.... We all make choices, never can go back to the 70s thru 90s, it was the best of times. Now I reach for other journeys.
Another poster many hope they don't run into on the mountain.
Moved to Wyoming 36 year ago this summer, not hard at all if you really want it.
The hippies are there regardless of how many hunters there are, and the public land holds game animals the states manage, their rules you have to play by.
The problem , that is the root problem is---------- the same with the crowded streets----too many people!!! too many drivers and too many hunters. It makes for hard feelings with no solution, I can relate to all said above. I want to hunt every year too!!!
Let me see if I can explain my point a little bit more federal dollars are given to the states based on their license and sales so that’s why Colorado changed and mimicked Arizona and Utah and make you purchase a license in order to get a preference point notice how they didn’t just increase the cost of a preference point because that was $50. They have to sell a license and now it’s 117 so if I’m paying Colorado for $117 license for 13 years and you get reimbursed from the federal level Back to state of Colorado then aren’t I paying taxes too ? And shouldn't I have a stake and some of that land as well it’s not my fault that Colorado decided to get more money. My federal dollars are the same as your federal dollars. I’m not throwing stones at anybody on this forum I’m just saying Colorado parks and wildlife is playing all of us to a certain degree .
And yes. We should be sticking together as hunters and understand each other's POV
Your federal dollars manage the land not the animals, how hard is that to understand? The state manages the wildlife.
You are free to recreate all you want on those federal lands just have to play by the state rules on wildlife and hunting.
I see the point of view but don't agree with NRs should get the same quotas and fees as residents. Live in the state for that privilege.
Every NR says their taxes pay for federal lands out West but I have yet to see any facts to support that. Your tax dollars could be paying for a national monument in DC for all we know.
Dingle and johnson. Go read it
And never did I say res and NR should have equal numbers.
Orion let me get you a tampon for all the nonresident that bother you!!
According to social media and such.... hunter numbers are down across the entire country except Colorado!
No one can answer this question i see.... How is 25% of tags for nonresident creating over crowding at the trail heads? There is 23 million acres of public land and your saying that (25%) nonresident with tags are creating a problem for you and your hunting areas?
“According to social media and such.... hunter numbers are down across the entire country except Colorado!”
Like hell they are. That may be true in the east, south, midwest, but they sure aren’t down in the west. Even in Wyoming, hunter density is bad in most general areas, but at least the number of nonresidents are limited. For those that live in Colorado, it’s no wonder they’re beyond fed up after years and years of unlimited NR OTC tags. Had I dealt with what they’ve dealt with for years, I wouldn’t feel too generous about the percentage of licenses given to NR either, so you’re probably venting to the wrong crowd if you’re looking for sympathy.
As several have pointed out, life’s all about choices and priorities. You can either relocate if it’s important enough to you, or you can stay put and complain.
I feel worse for young Colorado resident hunters far more than us NR. Keeping OTC and allowing folks to build points while acquiring tags will only lead to more creep. Dozens of hunt codes young guys will have zero chance to draw in their lifetime unless they live into their 90’s. In many other states there is some sort of random element to at least the resident draw. And they’ll have to contend with the full effects of the wolf situation. Meanwhile many of the gray hairs mainly driving these changes will be able to chase down the premium hunt of their choice, or already have, and will have easier access to the better than average tags for a few more years before they phase out. If you residents wanted to make some fair and positive changes a random or at least weighted draw, like MSG, for resident deer, elk, and lopes would be a good start. Old guys will never let that happen though. They get preferential treatment simply for existing first!
People above saying only 25% of tags are going to non residents need to get their facts straight. This is from thread in CO forum. In recent years more than 1/2 the tags are going to non residents. Those are facts coming from CPW.
Again no one talking about dropping non resident to 10% or below 25% but currently more non resident are bowhunting elk in CO than residents. Hard to argue that is fair.
Nonrestakingurtags, no disrespect intended, but your posts make you appear clueless.
And you have proof your Dingle-Johnson money went to a Western state?
Doesn't matter the quarry, quality hunting is in demand, and the supply is very limited. Kansas is looking to limit the days non resident waterfowl hunters can hunt public next year. The people on public has exploded in the last 5 years. Mississippi is taking action to limit NR turkey hunters early I'm the season. As the population swells, urban sprawl takes habitat out, and leases price people out of hunting private more people will be chasing a limited resource. It's just not sustainable.
John, what you are implying and cnelk above I think is simply a 25% NR participation cap in any given unit. Sounds great for resident hunters. As I mentioned above though, unless it’s a true cap most of these high quota former OTC units that residents don’t really want to hunt, especially now that resident OTC is likely to be retained, will wind up in NR hands anyway through the leftover channels. So your graphs aren’t going to change a whole lot. If they did implement a true cap you’re talking about hitting the department with a huge net loss. Some of that could be made up by doubling NR tag prices if you’re going to have roughly half as many hunters, but would still mean a significantly lower federal payout from PR dollars with how many fewer licenses are sold. Is the department willing to take an 8 figure hit to significantly lessen the competition in units that most residents don’t want or consider backup options?
John MC. Very interesting…..
JohnMC. I don't think anyone has said that NR archery hunters have only been getting 25%. Those charts prove that. Once they do away with OTC for NR the R's will have the option to get 80% and 75% (after the landowner tags) IF (big IF) they want them. But R have pretty much made it clear that they aren't interested in getting some tags. Look up the units that Grasshopper brings up in the SW. They can be drawn with 0 pts. But it has to be down as first choice to guarantee that tag. So apparently it's not worth it to them. And I get that. But that tag is setting there for them if they want it.
KB and I must have been typing at the same time
nonrestakingurtags. I am a Wisconsin resident. I have hunted in several of the western states since the early 80's. Things were great back then. It was relatively easy to find some good hunting and solitude. Not no more! I can attest to the current overcrowding. It is very difficult to experience a quality hunt in any OTC unit in any state that still offers them.
I am fine with limiting nonresidents if it leads to higher quality hunt even if i am only able to hunt every couple years. I also agree that the residents should receive the majority of the tags. After all they live there, pay taxes and support their local economy year-round. I would also bet that some of the residents that live there because of the recreational opportunities could possibly take jobs in other states making more $ but stay for the above reason.
Solo
Clueless!!
Clueless!!
I guess i am clueless and illiterate also but the numbers seem to say otherwise! Read for yourself if you can!
I have not said a word about OTC.
I can say i think there are too many residents hunting otc because why would you? You have a 60 plus % chance to draw a limited draw tag so why would you hunt a otc?
Ksrancher, nonrestakingurtag did. Not that I am lumping rest of you in with him. Myself and I think most residents are in no way form or fashion saying we want to kick all non residents out of the state for elk hunting but somewhere in the 60/40 to 70/30 percentage is reasonable.
Ill play 'nonrestakingurtag's game
Here are the elk applicants in 2016
Here are the elk applicants in 2024
Last I check we were talking about bowhunting and this is bowsite. If you look at rifle hunting it is a different story. The chart by the guy that made a handle just to be the agonizer on this topic obviously includes rifle tags as well.
Nonrescrybabywhiner, no CO resident on this forum cares what you think. You aren't going to get any sympathy here. What are you trying to accomplish besides venting? Why don't you hunt elk in all the other western states? You can apply in AZ, NM, UT, NV, WY, MT, OR, WA, CA. Oh wait, I remember now - they dont like nonresidents in those states either.
Get over it. This is hunting in the West in 2024. Learn how to play the game or stay in North Carolina and hunt snakes and hogs and tiny deer. Or move to a western state that is more resident-friendly. Many do that. You can too.
Sorry about that JohnMC. I didn't catch that he said that. And thanks for not lumping me in with him. I think a lot of people like you and I have reasonable expectations. But unfortunately it's the ones that with unreasonable expectations (NR and R) that make the most noise
Wytex.
That federal money is based on license sales. To say where the money goes? Id say this. Why would CPW go to the trouble to change the PP system to a mandatory license attachment (that most if not all NR will NEVER use, small game license) if CO weren’t getting the federal reimbursement.
But thx everyone for the dialog…….Now I have to figure out what OTC unit I am going to……..;)
Quote: "You have a 60 plus % chance to draw a limited draw tag so why would you hunt a otc?"
For whatever it's worth (which is not much) the 60% is not draw success, but rather the portion of the total quota taken by resident adults. Draw success is in the next row down on the recap you posted, outlined in grey. Adult residents 34% success on first choices. Which of course includes cow tags, PLO tags, 4th rifle tags, etc.
No way. This is a site about bow hunting?? Couldn't have guessed. Last i checked mountaincreek's first post was about % of drawn tags. Didnt say what weapon. Didnt say a word about otc, rifle tags, or anything to that affect. You are the ones losing your minds on nonresident hunters. I get it. I actually hunt in 6 different states and successfully in all.
60% or 34% are both really rather pointless stats when you have a system where folks burn their first choice to attain a point and still likely wind up with a tag of their choosing anyway. Moral of the story for me, 80/20+75/25 and cutting NR OTC won’t be good enough for residents. Capped NR participation is likely down the road. The department will take a big hit financially in favor of residents who are squabbling over the crumbs (2nd/3rd/4th choice hunts). Younger residents are hosed on ever having at least a chance at a number of premium hunts in their home state and NR will be hosed at having any real chance of hunting Colorado more than once or twice period as quotas are slashed, point logjams build up and the wolf ordeal changes the dynamics long term. The end. :)
How does the Dingell- Johnson act (which is tied to sport fishing) affect elk? Last I heard it went to states fish and wildlife agencies to support recreational fishing.
"“But what are Co resident bowhunters going to bitch about next :)“ Here’s a couple - residents need the 75:25 ratio on all 4 Choices. Residents need first chance at Leftover Licenses"
Brad for Prez.
As someone who hunts as a NR every fall...Residents should get every tag they desire. NR should be thankful for and happy they get ANY opportunity whatsoever.
^^Yup. Will be my 14th season this September. Plenty of opportunity still available
I can remember hunting elk and Mulies is CO before the 3 wheeler was invented. Fast forward to 2024. Wow how times have changed. I’ve stuck it out hunting the western states and have been through several changes over the years. I will continue to play the system because I have to stay here in IL until my parents are gone. I retire in 3 years and plan on buying a place out west and getting things in order for when the day comes. I’m not rushing anything but will be honest I can’t wait to live out west.
Shane
This shit is really simple if you don’t live somewhere in the west quit your bitching about how tags are doled out.
You can go ahead and move to the west and your problem is solved !
Willieboat always cuts right to the quick!
Apparently their (CO residents in this thread) problems aren’t solved though. As mentioned above, they still need NR caps and further preferential treatment on low demand tags…
^^^ Willie has spoken, pretty much settles it ;^)
The reason we need choices 2-4 to also apply NR limits is because of the dozen or so units recently switched from OTC to limited.
People in the some parts of the country really have a hard time understanding what it’s like to live in a state that thousands of nonresident hunters flock to each year. They just have never experienced it in most cases
Residents have been pushed into fewer OTC units because tags in the units which were OTC are being mostly sold to NR.
Ken, they’re mostly being sold to NR because residents don’t want them. If they did want them they’d apply first choice and be guaranteed any of those tags. Most would rather gain a point than lock in one of those hunts. That’s a choice, not a big oppressive NR favoritism scam you guys are making it out to be.
I assume you have a place you hunt regularly, probably yearly, maybe for decades and even generations. Let's call that your home unit.
What if 60% of your home unit tags were now going to non-residents.
Maybe I can use my first choice to get your home unit tag because I can collect points in your neighbor state. But maybe you want to do something else with your first choice. So, I can now have your home unit hunt.
What if the tag allocation rules were like Colorado where 100% of the tags in some units "could" be given to non-residents.
What if you had to give up your home unit to hunt Colorado.
Our home units are here and we shouldn't have to give them up to wait for a limited unit.
“But maybe you want to do something else with your first choice.”
Again, that’s your choice and not the department’s or NR’s fault you choose to value a point over guaranteeing a “home unit” tag.
You do realize by banking points and eventually drawing a limited unit you’re making it harder for someone in that unit to acquire their “home unit” with any regularity, right?
To the OP,
everyone knows that the change to buy a hunting license was a money grab to get more NR dollars and Federal tax dollars. I get that you don't like it, but it's what every state does. In Idaho, if you want to apply for elk, you have to buy a NR hunting license that costs well north of $200. NV and AZ have been around $150 for over a decade.
And these states all give LESS tags to NRs that CO. If you picked one state to have a gripe with, CO was the wrong one because they are by far the most generous with their tags.
Hell, CA gives out 1 NR elk tag per year. 1 single NR elk tag. CA makes CO look like the Bernie Sanders of NR elk tag distribution.
I count 363 elk tags in CA's draw. That's 0.275% of tags to NRs.
Pretty much every other Western state is under 20%.
If all states changed to 1% of tags to NR then it would be ok? So many lemmings..........
Yes Don, it would be perfectly fine. Move. I am beyond tired of people from east of the Mississippi telling us how we should be doing things with our western game animals.
Ike, I think New Mexico has a higher percentage of tags wind up in NR hands than CO actually. If not, it’s close. (Landowner vouchers).
New Mexico has commercialized elk hunting. Colorado is simply making it a tiny bit more favorable to residents who have been getting screwed for a couple decades.
There's a nice little two bedroom house for sale right across the road from me in northern CO for only $465,000. You can hunt elk from home if you want. There are full time job openings here in our mountain community. Move here, or STFU.
I’m in AK, so I’m alright Lou! But I understand the sentiments, for the most part, and do respect you CO guys’ efforts. However I do feel like there’s a difference between “tiny bit more favorable”/some warranted and reasonable changes and going full out “f*ck the NR” which would be the result of a 2nd-4th preference system. It would create a huge NR point logjam and if the quotas/leftover process isn’t overhauled most of those tags would still go to NR anyway. Kowtowing to folks who want a preference point AND the tag of their choice doesn’t sound like a reasonable system anywhere, no matter what state I live in. That’s the only reason I spouted off in this thread and have probably beat that horse plenty at this point. I’ll take the lack of banter about it from residents as a sign it’s an uncomfortable conversation and politely move along. Good luck. :)
What caused all the problems was limiting the South side of the San Juan's, Grand Mesa and Flat Tops. NR are now getting the majority of the tags in most of those units. They have reduced OTC to near the breaking point. Limiting NR to 25% of choices 2-4 would fix that.
Damn, all the bitching about NR hunters and unfair distribution of elk tags to resident hunters in CO almost makes me glad I live in a state where you can reasonably expect to draw a resident bull elk tag every 20 - 30 years and don’t have to deal with too much overcrowding during archery season.
Look how KS residents has had to deal with an invasion of deer hunters on their limited resource.
NM's landowner welfare program is a completely different discussion. Apples and oranges. I don't participate in it. I'm in the 6% pool in NM.
My last thought is this. Residents should get all available tags. after that it's the generosity of the state as how many NR tags are given.
Kaleb, I wasn't referring to you, but rather to those who are going nuts over STILL having the best NR elk opportunity in the U.S., even after the change.
Actually AK does offer a few unlimited elk options for NR, GG. I won’t offer up hunt codes, but they’re probably not in any danger of becoming too popular. They are available though.
Hard to say if AK caters to residents more than any others. Would depend on your criteria I suppose. Could be argued they cater to wealthy NR’s far more than any other state. And to NR relatives of folks who live here. In some resident’s minds it’s not all roses…
Anyway, we’re getting into the weeds there and I already attempted to bow out. My only point was I don’t agree with a system where preference is given to residents first and foremost, those residents FORFEIT that preference, AND then still think they deserve preferential treatment down the line. Which would result in totally upending the system, not only for NR’s but potentially both the department and even some fellow residents. Guys like Ken are having a hard time tracking that, but I think it’s a legitimate and fair stance.
I am going to Alaska in August. Be back on late Sept. Alaska is all about money.....
There are two registration elk hunts in AK, GG. That’s one version of OTC for us. If you’re looking at next season’s options they may not be on the site yet. Also, at least some of the draw options don’t have NR caps built in. They could theoretically draw every tag for some hunts.
That aside, I’m waiting on a delayed plane and have some time to kill so I guess I’ll spell it out. It really isn’t a R vs NR situation entirely. It’s an opposition to furthering serious point creep in a true preference point system for both R’s and NR’s.
Here goes: I’ll use unit 80 for example since grasshopper mentioned it far above in this thread. Apologies if a little of my data is off, but I think you’ll still get the gist… I believe the department claims that hunt used to take in about 3200 participants. Since going limited they set the quota at 2000 tags. Nice reduction in competition! 380 residents applied first choice this year and got a tag. Meanwhile 1353 NR applied first choice, forgoing points and/or a chance at gaining a point and received tags. Second choice is a crapshoot, so 76 out of 580 residents got one and 112 out of 803 NR cleaned up the rest. What grasshopper, cnelk, Serrano, etc are campaigning for in here is to cap those NR first choices at 500 and also cap the second choice availability and so on. That would do two things. First, there were only 1108 total resident apps. So, if NR were only allowed 500/2000 tags in that first pass, there is absolutely no reason any resident should apply for that code first choice. They could all draw it second choice. That means 380 extra point holders in the resident pool next year. Secondly it means 853 nonresidents who drew it first choice would be kicked down the line, also gaining a point. So 1233 total points in the system the following year that won’t be under the current setup. What really doesn’t make sense in this situation is to implement a system like that for some relatively low demand units, and because there’s only 1108 total resident applications, which we can likely assume many of those folks are going to wind up with different choices than this one and/or turn it back in, you’re still going to have close to half or more nonresident participation in that hunt. Many of those NR’s are going to wind up with a tag they applied for first choice AND gain a point! That’s crazy. Now do that over multiple hunts in a similar boat like Serrano is talking about. You create a giant influx of point builders and really aren’t changing the net result much for anyone other than a handful of residents who want to forfeit their first choice AND still receive preferential treatment in the next round. Do that for enough years in enough units and even resident tags are going to see greater point creep affects. It’s bad enough young guys, both R and NR, have zero chance whatsoever at drawing some CO hunts in their life. Making a change like these fellows are in favor of is only going to make that worse.
All that ^^^ stuff…It ain’t gonna happen, but if you’re going to dream, dream big.
Next topic?
Most of it already is happening Brad. Some percentage of those 504 unsuccessful second choice residents bailed on their opportunity at that tag in the first pass and are now pissed they didn’t get it when it all shook out. If you get your way, some percentage of that 380 first choice will realize they’re wasting an opportunity applying for that code first choice. And the number of NR gaining a point on that hunt code has to skyrocket. What happens after that will depend how the department divvies out the remainders. The fact remains residents really don’t even want half of those tags (only 960 1st/2nd choice apps). But it would undoubtedly add more points to both systems.
If I am truly wrong though, lay it out there instead of just a quippy little brush aside. You guys love to reference how other states treat their resident hunters vs your situation. What other states are rewarding their residents for forfeiting a first opportunity in favor of a point?
Nothing to do with CO - but I think WY has it right for both the resident and the NR. Their way is about as fair as you can get in my opinion.
Residents have what I’ll call “general” areas that are OTC to them if they don’t draw a LE tag - no points. They can hunt elk every single year in their state.
For the NR we have options based on preference points but also a small percentage of random tags regardless of points held. Also a special pool you can try if you’re willing to shell out more $$$$ to increase your odds of drawing a tag.
KB, If we residents did what you suggest and apply for those former OTC tags as a first choice and stop collecting points, NR would be left with their 25% anyway. So it doesn't change anything for NR if we can save for a limited tag while drawing those tags with our second choice.
The broken system that allows an unlimited % of tags to go to NR has to end.
The thread that just keeps on a giving.........LOLOLOL Hunt when you can, where ya can, while ya can. Complicated shit for sure.
I am missing a good quarrel.
Nr's take heart, while archery elk might be limited draw soon, the quota will be so freaking high you will get tags and you will hunt those same 4point 2.5 year old bulls.
Government and greed for money. Unlikely that will change.
One person asked what about allocations? the split should be across all 4 choices. There will still be leftovers, take heart, giant quotas will be sold to all.
This whole thing might sound scary, but unlikely you won't be able to get a license here. Wolf transplants are expensive.
Lol, first world problems for sure.
I’ll agree to disagree gents. I will say, if in your shoes, rather than making an already convoluted draw system more complicated I’d be campaigning to put those SW units back on the resident OTC list (assuming you retain OTC). Sounds better than bickering over a handful of tags most residents don’t really want. Good luck.
I thought most of them just threw a giant party when the department changed their recommendation on resident OTC? Hard to keep up. Old School is 100% correct about Wyoming.
KB here why you don't listen to what one person says everyone he knows says.
According to CPW survey of 6000 hunters the vast majority of residents wants OTC to stay for residents
Residents should come first in any state, but if you hunt Elk in Colorado it should cost you a point/points no mattet what. That would stop the over crowding of any unit for the most part.
Is the elk population in CO growing, declining or stable? Just curious as an outsider who’s never hunted there and likely won’t.
And, now the wolves will have to be fed. Just wait for them to multiply.
I agree with Grey Ghost and Orion. OTC is not management, it is a free-for-all.
And "what people want" should be a consideration, but not the be-all-end-all of game management. We'd all like to be able to hunt whatever we want every year, but sometimes, the resource cant keep up with demand and thus it is the job of the managing biologists to limit hunting participation in order to sustain healthy herds.
A cow:bull ratio of 90:10 is not healthy. Allowing a tiny percentage of males of the specie to get to a mature age is not healthy. It's not natural.
And because it's not natural, the hunting experience is not natural. Once you hunt elk and mule deer in a really good unit, you see how things are supposed to be and what a pathetic version of hunting that most hunting is. Yes, you can pay a woman for sex, but it will always be a pathetic version of the real thing you get from a woman who loves you.
And you don't have to limit most hunting/tags to achieve a good result. You just have to limit some of it.
For those of you who want to do away with OTC, here is what would happen if they did: the quota would set to exacty or higher then participation level we have today, the crowding won't get better, and the herds won't get bigger bulls. It doesn't change the herd management plans or goals, which are set for "maximum opportunity". So what will happen if OTC goes away? You get to spend your hard earned points or stay home. Mid tier units will be crushed by those 15,000 residents now forced to apply, you won't draw that tag.
Limited licenses and OTC are nothing more then license distribution SCHEMES. Assuming changing the licensing SCHEME equates to lower hunter density or improved herd dynamics would be poor judgment.
"For those of you who want to do away with OTC, here is what would happen if they did: the quota would set to exacty or higher then participation level we have today..."
Generally, yes, and that's what's basically happened everywhere they've changed a unit from OTC to a draw. Those of us who are in favor of doing away with OTC also are in favor of them placing a reasonable cap on the tags as well. You're right, it makes no sense to do one without the other.
The elk herd in sw COlorado is declining. With what the area CPW says, the cow/calf ratio is a whopping 30/4. For every 30 cows, they're seeing 4 calves. And yes, they're blaming bear. But yet we're not allowed to hunt the big 400 pound bears that spend most of May, June and July in the calving areas.
Controlling the OTC licenses would be easy, cap it!! And make the tags unit specific. If you buy a tag in an otc unit, you're stuck hunting that unit, not being able to jump from unit to unit looking for rutting elk. CPW says it'd be hard to do that, but it wouldn't be hard at all. But the CPW field officers would actually have to do their jobs checking hunters.
As far as elk numbers go, the Southern Utes found out several years ago when they collered 10 bulls on the winter range, 7 of those 10 were found that summer in unit 76. Makes you wonder how many of those 76 elk are being counted in 77/78 and 75. The local CPW officers will tell you how low the elk numbers are now on the wintering ranges that they watch.
https://youtube.com/shorts/elWietXZYwA?si=UTfCSFkJuopltPpC
https://www.outdoorlife.com/hunting/colorado-eliminates-nonresident-otc-archery-elk-tags/
Welllllllll. Wyatt. Just in time
Pull up a chair……
Welllllllll. Wyatt. Just in time
Pull up a chair……
You know you can post a clickable link...
I put in for Oregon elk and they give 5%. 35% sounds great.
