Contributors to this thread:
Co draw stats the future is bright!
Sticksender has had some great threads.
I wish she was wrong I hope he is wrong.... but he is not!
In the past many of known me to be all doom and gloom. Truth be told I spend a lot of money applying every year and I’m very lucky.
I hope to educate people about the true draw and statistics.
Even in my worst nightmare I could not have predicted what happened in Colorado.
Let’s try to get some positive ideas.
Even I have to admit I struggle with this one.
I am lucky I have drawn Colorado elk, sheep, and mountain goat!
If they can use the extra money to increase Habitat and Management we could actually result in better odds!
Let’s keep this light and hopeful.
Yes it may take my daughters 90 years to draw a decent elk tag but on the positive side people are living a lot longer these days!
If it’s all about the revenue why charge 3 dollars and get 50k moose applicants for a handful of tags, or whatever it came out to. Charge $30-100 a point, make the same amount, and have a fraction of the applicants so it’s still realistic to draw in a lifetime. They could make more money with way less applicants. It makes no sense.
I’ll = elk
Sorry I can’t edit from my phone
Yes you can edit from your phone.
Turn it sideways and you’ll see the edit button
They just need to charge $50 to apply for sheep/moose/goat for residents and NRs and it'll cut down the people who are not as passionate about the hunt and increase revenue in the same stroke. They're not going to go back to requiring the tag fee upfront, which is the only way to get back to the odds that existed before.
The bottom line is there are more people who want to hunt elk in what they perceived as a "good" hunting spot than there are "good" hunting spots. And that's not just in Colorado. That's everywhere. So there really are no magic solutions. That's just the way it is. You could jack up prices to lower demand but that just makes it a rich guys sport. The other alternatives are all variations of some kind of draw and there will never be enough permits to satisfy the draw demand for everyone in any reasonable period of time.
I don't want to rain on any parades but I doubt that any increased revenue will go to habitat/management efforts. It will be used up for non-hunting recreational purposes.
So much for light and hopeful!
My positive may be that I'll just go ahead and burn all my max moose points applying for a cow moose tag the next year or 2 before the big wave hits 3 points and is in the draw. That way I'll check another CO species off my bucket list and get a freezer full of great meat!
Good luck with your cow tag. Cow tag odds last year were 1 in 10 in my unit (ignoring weighted points). This year there were 65% more applicants. My back up plan of switching to a cow tag might not even work.
Oh...bright spot...um...I care less about draw tags every year so I'm not as disappointed as I would have been if this happened 10 years ago.
Colorado’s population keeps growing.
For some odd reason, so do my taxes.
Colorado legalized marijuana and put massive taxes on it because that would really be a boon to our economy. Don’t use that stuff and don’t want to be around it.
And my taxes all continue to go up.
Roads across the state are in pitiful shape. Guess all those vehicle taxes I pay are helping take care of the roads in some other part of the state.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife has been making the most of any state for hunting license sales. More than double any two western states. In order for them to make that kind of revenue, we residents get to put up with hordes of people from all over the world every hunting season.
CPW has been waging a war against game fish on the western slope trying to eradicate all the smallmouth, walleyes, and pike. Heck they are spending millions on that little program to reduce opportunity and protect fish species that are considered trash fish about anywhere else - heck, some states even pay bounties for the ones Colorado is protecting!
If CPW (and all the state sportsmen’s groups) was focused on their customers, they would start limiting the numbers of nonresidents to something less overwhelming and maybe reduce resident license fees because of what we have to put up with for crowding. Nope, in the interest of making even more money, CPW (and local sportsman’s groups) have pushed for and gotten raises to fees across the board with the biggest hit, by far, to hunters!
Then, too make it even better, they changed the application system to encourage a huge increase in applications. Ofcourse they are upset they didn’t get the maximum price for applications and missed out on a gob if easy money this year! So we can be happy that they will raise application fees next year!
Makes me wonder who all is smoking too much whacky weed...
Colorado property values are increasing pretty rapidly. In a year or two I can probably get enough out of my house to write a check for the next one in another state like Wyoming or Alaska where the state governments are not quite as greedy and the hunting and fishing is still not too bad.
I did not draw the hybrid unit 2 tag this year, so I will have 8 points to burn next year. I'm confident that will be enough for the unit I have picked out. If things get too much out of control here, I'm going to northern Michigan or the UP.
I think if the charges were 1000$ per specie to apply it would remedy all this draw problem. ;). Let’s make this where only doctors and lawyers can afford to get lucky.
Better yet, allowing people with my name only to apply would be best. Yes that is the solution. ;)
Ain’t no deer in the UP, PECO!
Light and Hopeful?
We can hunt elk every year in Co. ...so there is a silver lining.
The days of drawing a lot of limited draw tags as a non res is over bro...too much 'Demand'....and not enough 'Supply'.
I have no beef with the change in the application system. It was silly to charge a bunch of money and then process it and then refund most of it. What needs to change is the draw system. If we're going to have this many applicants every year then the simple points system we have not isn't going to cut it because it is like buying a scratch off lottery ticket. The odds are just too great to expect as a resident (who pays taxes to support the state and license fees to support the wildlife) to hunt very often. I have hunted on a cow tag in the same unit for 3 years and was able to draw without a point. This year I was unsuccessful in the draw. To me it looks like the system needs to change to something like half the tags are up for lottery to anyone regardless of points and the other half are available to anyone with points that was unsuccessful in the general draw. Seem to me that the OTC tags should only be available to residents.
rideold: if the CPW cut out all OTC tags to NRs then the CPW would have to lay off a bunch of employees. I'm not saying its right or wrong, but just stating the facts. The CPW depends on the OTC licenses sold to NRs. As I understand it the taxes (income, property, sales) that residents pay don't go to the CPW; only license sales and P-R money funds the CPW. NRs fund the CPW way more than Rs.
Elkstabber: Yep, I get that the NR fees fund a lot of the program. I just bristle to see resident odds go south so far this year. I just hope the funding structure doesn't swing to be dominated by NR. I'll be the first to admit that I don't know how the whole system is supposed to work and I don't blame anyone at CPW for how things have worked out this year. I'm not a "government is always dishonest" kind of guy. It just seems to me that the system could be better.
Pretty sure that its way too late. NRs fund more then Rs. Again, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that that's how it is and has been for many years.
PECO - the UP has more wolves than deer anymore....
I’d be happy to pay more for resident tags and decrease NR tags. Also, increase pp cost and you could offset a lot of the nr funding. But we all know when it comes to government they don’t want to offset. They want to add money. So we’ll probably see increased tag cost, increased pp cost, and increased NR tags!
No, No, No!!!! Stop saying you would be happy to pay more for a resident tag, pp and app fee "if." You will end up paying a lot more for a resident tag, and they will NOT decrease the number of NR tags. You will get screwed, stop asking for resident increases, it will not end well!
"Ain’t no deer in the UP, PECO!" Also ain't many people. I have good hunting connections south of Lansing.
The "Elite three' moose...Sheep and Goat 50 bucks app fee and $1250 for a tag...if you look at what it cost to hunt any of these anywhere else that is the bargain a lifetime and set the computer for weighted points to mean more
Peco I think you started seeing red and didnt read the last sentence. Haha
Adventurewriter: For a NR the moose, sheep and goat are $2,211 each currently, not $1,250 as you suggested.
For comparison: MT sheep is 1,250; UT Sheep is $1,518; NV sheep is $1,200.
Adventurewriter, I read it all, just wanted to reenforce that "we" should not say we are ok "if" because the "ifs" never happen.
Below is a response to an email I sent to a dow board member:
Now that we have authorization from the legislature we are going to raise the application fees for 2019. There was no way for us to do that under existing law. The actual amounts we are going to begin discussion this week along with preference creep implications at the Commission Meeting on Thursday.
This component of the new IPAWS system met one very strategic need. Parents were having trouble getting kids started putting in for tags. Three kids and a parent ran thousands. Youth recruitment is our biggest challenge.
In addition, I spent a week at Glenwood Springs watching the staff check in bears, sheep, goats. I was shocked at the impact of fees on the North American model. Every out of state hunter was wealthy. At least half of in state hunters were wealthy. That is the European model where hunting is for a privileged few. I am committed to making it more accessible for the average working and middle class hunter. Doing what we can to at least get rid of the useless practice of holding huge amounts of money we are prohibited by law from investing, then refunding most if it was costing us substantial funds. It also was costing folks interest on credit card balances for no reason.
Appreciate your input and we’ll be discussing this topic on Thursday if you want to dial in or listen to the recording. We are concerned about preference pt creep and that difficult issue I’d be grateful for any advice you might have for me.
I think Ted was talking resident tag fees for the big 3, not non residents.
So was the DOW board member getting all those hunters tax returns? How did he determine they were all "wealthy"? Sounds like typical political B.S.
I was just thinking the same thing, Aspen Ghost. He has no idea if they're wealthy or not. Having a nice truck and top end gear certainly doesn't mean you're rich.
I think by board member your referring to a Parks and Wildlife Commissioner.
Read the CPW Director’s letter for the June Wildlife Commisioners Meeting.
They are going full out while they have the “support” of the sportsmen’s groups and raise all the fees for next year to get as much as they can.
"Read the CPW Director’s letter for the June Wildlife Commisioners Meeting.
They are going full out while they have the “support” of the sportsmen’s groups and raise all the fees for next year to get as much as they can."
If I'm reading correctly, the Legislature approved up to $100 for the preference point fee for each species as well as up to $20 for application fees. Ouch.
I can see where he is coming from regarding how much a family had to front and not wanting a European like model. If that is the case, make it a 20 dollar app fee and straight lottery if you don't want a pp. Maybe start 50% lottery tags 50% pp tags for the next 5 years with no ability to continue to accumulate points. Essentially just give an avenue for those with points to use them up while transitioning to a straight lottery draw. It isn't totally fair but it is what it is.
Good stuff guys I have to admit I really really tried to find a positive spin but it is nearly impossible. I have drawn elk, mnt goat, sheep and mule deer this year so I am very lucky.
Also as someone else said I am getting older and not as crazy excited as I used to be when I was younger.
And if they raise fees it will help odds:)
As someone who guides out of state hunters, it’s pretty easy to tell which ones are wealthy before ever asking what they do. The random teacher that saves for 5 years to go on a hunt doesn’t look, or act the same as the guys making 500k+ a year. It’s also pretty easy when a guy talks about the hunts he went on this year and in your head you can estimate his hunting budget at 40-50k. A hunter talking about shooting a lion as one of the animals on his safari and the next year shooting another, at a 50k pricetag, and it doesn’t take long to figure things out. Your average American isn’t going on 3 plus guided hunts a year or a safari and shooting more than impalas, monkeys and warthogs. You talk to someone for 5 minutes when they are checking an animal and you can tell whether or not they have to work to scrape together a living. You can be in denial all you want but his statements were spot on. How many working class Americans can afford to apply for just one CO moose tag when you used to have to front thousands. Now multiple that by 4-5 specie and 7-8 states like some of you do, a middle class American would have to mortgage their home to make those applications. Sure a guy making 60 grand a year might be sporting a $5000 rifle, $2000 optics and wearing $1200 worth of one camo outfit but odds are... that guy is not your average work a day American.
So...If im reading the potential change to the application/preference point fees correctly-for a CO Resident- you would pay a $10 app fee and then $100 per point per species? Now if I applied for prefence points for all 7 species I actually pay the DOW $710 x5 for me, my wife and three kids? At least before I got all of my money back except for $3. How is that not catering to the wealthy? Are those fees only if you didnt have a license the year prior? Someone please correct me if im wrong.
From the link posted by fap1800 it appears inevitable that preference/bonus points for all big game species will cost $100 each, and that application fees will be $10 for Rs and $20 for NRs. Did I read that right?
I have been lucky in the draws but I do worry about my Daughters opportunities for all states. I guess times are changing...
There are all ready avenues for the wealthy to get tags(landowner) in most states. State draws should be feasible for middle class Americans. I think 40-50$ per application for NR is plenty. A family of four could apply for 2-3 species in 4-5 states for roughly $1000 a year... and still not pull a tag. New Mexico does it right imo, other than fronting the tag price.
aboks, the preference point fee is not refundable. You won't get it back. So the $710 x 5 is money you spent for the chance for that year. And it will cost you that every year just for the chance.
Colorado will raise the non refundable application fees and will start charging for preference points as soon as they can.
The new law allows them to charge up to $10 for residents and $20 for nonresidents for application fees and up to $100 per preference point per species.
It will be interesting to see how they handle “weighted points “ and fees for those as they were not specified in the new statute. Weighted “points” are not Preference Points.
Director Brocheid’s message in this letter could not be more clear. Raise the fees to the maximum allowable by the new statute as soon as possible and look hard at how much more they can squeeze out sportsmen by statute going into the future.
No accountability for managing spending.... But of course the highest hunting license revenue generating agency in the country was just awarded the ability to go for even more money from hunters and fishermen so the must be doing it right!
$100/point is one way to reverse point creep... If they pull that I'll abandon my points there and stay at home to hunt squirrels.
If they're going to raise the pp/app fee, I just hope they do it before people get 3 points because they'll be vested and have a shot and no one will want to drop out.
As I see it, Colorado Parks and Wildlife is funding ALL operations on the backs of hunters and fisherman. (R & NR) Where is the incentive to encourage hunter recruitment long term? Parks passes, annual registration fees, off road vehicle licenses, etc need to be raised in parallel with sportsmen fees. There is strength in numbers with many more non hunters vs hunters. It seems to me folks are seeing the results of consolidating the Parks Division and CDOW. IE Revenue generator funding the loss leaders within outdoor activities. Where is the annual budgetary restraint within Parks and Wildlife with this recipe?
Maybe all that money they will be collecting can go to more "hug a hunter" commercials.
New Mexico tried dropping the up front fee years ago. The odds went to crap and all the serious hunters screamed. They changed it back pretty quickly. I don't particularly like fronting all the money, but will gladly do it if it keeps thousands of people and all their relatives from applying.
Typical politics--the response i received from one of commission members to an email i posted earlier in the thread was all about keeping fees low to help youth, and the average working class joe. I dont have a problem spending some money for points but I cant imagine dropping $3500 a year for points only for my family. the almighty dollar always wins out though over everything so we will see.
I dont quite get the difference in cost of a deer tag vs. the cost of a preference point and how that whole thing will work. So if you draw a deer tag it costs you $31 but if you dont draw it costs you $100???
Z - If you look at the total income of CPW, hunting brings in the vast majority of their revenue.
It accounts for about 4X the fishing revenue.
Hunting revenue funds fishing and parks shortfalls. It also funds endangered species management and numerous programs and activities that CPW does not collect any income from.
Thanks Treeline. I appreciate your insight as a resident. Per your info, it reinforces my contention that a primary driver of CDOW and Parks consolidation was to leverage the revenue generated by hunters to fund the traditional loss leaders. (Many which were previously under the sole prevue of Parks.) I understand hunters dollars directly supporting wildlife (Including endangered species and habitat). I do not approve of hunters funding bike trails and the such. These (non hunting) users need to have more "skin in the game".
"I dont quite get the difference in cost of a deer tag vs. the cost of a preference point and how that whole thing will work. So if you draw a deer tag it costs you $31 but if you dont draw it costs you $100???" Yeah, someone please explain this.
I am not in favor of upping cost to feed the pigs that are not held accountable for their spending.
Fat pigs do make the best bacon...
What if you apply for a tag but if unsuccessful you don't get a point unless you pau the money. The downside of that is that people can pay for an advantage . All those not paying will see the odds of drawing reduced so it goes back to a rich mans sport. If a pp gets above 10 dollars i will be out, not because of affordability but due to principle.
I do not have any issue with fronting all tag fees. Anyone who REALLY wants to will apply for what they really want to apply for! 5 kid makes zero difference. Cut your going out to eat, coffee shop and bottled water budget by 20% and you have the $$$$ - plus much more after a couple years!
With Wyoming also having the freedom to raise point fees it will be interesting to see who will lead the race to have the most expensive points in the west.
Don, I dont think its a FRONTING the tag/preference fees, its the actual cost of the points. There is no mention that you get any of that $100 back. I never had an issue fronting my tag fees either with 5 of us hunting in my home. Tell me that you would be ok paying the DOW $100 per point, per species and applying for all 7 each year? $700 out of your pocket to hunt as a resident in Colorado and lets say that you only draw a deer tag a year?
NM wapiti I just guess I don’t figure when my non resident odds are .2% for a primo hunt or 8% for a late(nov) muzzy hunt that doubling the pool of people will hurt make my odds poor. ;) I get it, instead of pulling a tag every 12 years it would be a oil tag. Maybe front the money but have the draw 2 weeks after the deadline and that money could be used in other states.
I can't take this anymore. If you hold a license from the previous year be it an annual fishing or annual small game or any big game license there is no preference Point fee!
I love hunting but at some "point" (no pun intended) it will be too expensive for my taste. For instance I quit WY sheep when they raised the cost of points. As aboks points out at some point it simply becomes too cost prohibitive to justify tossing $ at points for very slim draw odds.
Page 2 of the regs. PAGE 2!!
I 100% agree with Don, fronting the money isn't an issue if you really want to hunt, I don't think that having a reasonable barrier to entry is turning this into a rich man's sport, I can comfortably float a bunch of tag fees now but that definitely wasn't always the case, when I was a teenager fronting the cash for sheep and goat was rough, but that wasn't an insurmountable problem,the current prospect of not ever drawing concerns me much more than having to work some extra hours over the course of my life.
SMARBA nailed it... ""I love hunting but at some "point" (no pun intended) it will be too expensive for my taste. For instance I quit WY sheep when they raised the cost of points. As aboks points out at some point it simply becomes too cost prohibitive to justify tossing $ at points for very slim draw odds.""
Dirk, the CPW fee structure was changed - the statue was revised to allow CPW to charge up to $100 per species for points.
Thank your state sportsmen’s group representatives for the privilege.
I doubt they will go that high initially across the board for all species, but expect them to set preference point fees by species to gain the extra revenue.
I do not understand the Director’s comment about “the current $30 to $40 (depending onspecies) that is currently charged under pay-to-play”?
Page 2 will be a bit different in 2019.
GrantK excellent way to look at it! A few extra hours versus no chance.
Thank you Treeline for your insight. It seems inevitable that we will soon be paying $10 for R and $20 for NR in order to apply, and that $100/point may very well become the cost to "maintain" a point. Colorado is going to milk us. We are their cash cow. There is no doubt that hunters have been carrying the bulk of the load and will continue to do so. The good news is that in CO the Hug a Hunter program is educating the general public.
Let me spin this a little bit differently. Right now the nonhunters aren't contributing much compared to the hunters. This makes us way more important for funding. This is critical in politics. Politicians respond to the groups with the most money. This gives us a lot of advantages in the political realm because of our contributions. Hopefully that means that hunters can get what we want.
What do we want? We want archery and gun ranges to introduce new people to archery/gun. We want fishing ponds to introduce kids to fishing because it is a gateway to getting them into hunting. We want a spring bear season in CO. You get the idea...
"I dont quite get the difference in cost of a deer tag vs. the cost of a preference point and how that whole thing will work. So if you draw a deer tag it costs you $31 but if you dont draw it costs you $100???" Anyone have an answer for this? Could it be the price of a tag will be well over a hundred bucks for residents? So then a point won't cost more than a tag?
Elkstabber thanks! That is exactly the kind of thing I was looking for! A silver lining very very good positive comment!
It is only a positive comment if we hunters organize and ask for something. If we contribute more $$$ and don't ask for anything then the bikers will get more bike trails and it will be our fault.
Treeline I just spoke with the folks at the Fort Collins office and when I asked if they were going to eliminate the discount preference Point fee for having a license the previous year they said that was just a rumor. All I got.
If CPW raises point fees, it wouldn't make sense to continue the exemption for those holding a prior year license. Because anyone who was not hunting, could simply buy the cheap fishing license, and the point of raising the pp fee would be completely moot.
If they apply for more than one species they can, and do, do that now.
When you consider the actual total cost of a hunt, another $100 ( for one species) isn't really all that much. Figure what you spend on transportation, gear& supplies, etc.,, and how much work you miss, and it's fairly insignificant. Almost everyone complains about point creep and is looking for a solution - this may kick a pretty good dent in it. My boys drop $100 on miscellaneous stuff like it's chump change and probably won't think twice about the extra cost. Being a stingy old fart, I'd probably just drop out of the points race...
ColoBull: it's not the extra $100 for one species IF YOU DRAW THE TAG. It' the extra $100 each year for 20 years accumulating points so that by the time you draw the tag you've spend $2,000 getting there that may be a deal breaker for many (myself included).
Dirk, look at the letter from the director of cpw and the new statute. CPW was given the ability in the new statute. We will see how much they go for.
Cool bull, $100 isn’t bad for a one time deal. It adds up quick for multiple species and then over multiple years as Smarba points out.
Hell $10 a year per species adds up quickly! Not only are you paying $$$ for a license, you have to add in the sunk cost of applications and, now point fees. That $30 deer license with a $10 app fee and a $10 point fee will cost you $130 with 5 years of applying to get that tag you want! Oh,I forgot the $8 increase (by statute) and 3% per year CPI increases = $42.77 or $142.77 for that tag! 10 years Applying for that really good tag and you are talking $250!
When people figure out the total amount that they will have to spend to potentially get a good tag, they will bail out of the system and go do something else.
Smarba, that's exactly how I look at it. I look at how much I will likely spend in the long run...especially deciding which states to apply, avoid, or drop! I'm slowly but surely dropping out of quite a few draws because I would rather spend my hard earned cash on other enjoyable trips than tossing my $ to the wind in application fees!
It's impossible to predict the future changes that may occur! As a great example...Colo may be a double-edged sword with all the brand new applicants that applied for the first time this year with such cheap application fees. It's like bait and switch! The CPW may charge more for pref pt/application fees now that everyone is hooked! Wyo is a great example where pref pt fees have gone through the roof. The price to play is getting crazy throughout the West....and it sounds like Colo is going to join the party! It's really sad to see this happen to the sport of hunting!
It's actually a joy to see some of the CPW adds on TV lately stating that hunters and fisherman in Colo are supporting wildlife!
I don't think residents have too much to worry about. Nonresidents better find something to bite on because it's going to hurt.
Anyone who thinks hunters are gaining power in Colorado because of the fees they pay is incredibly naive. The government of Colorado is being taken over by leftists who hate hunters either openly or secretly. They have no problem jacking up fees for hunters to pay for all their bike trails and parks because it serves two purposes: It funds their projects and punishes hunters. The CPW will give lip service to hunters but in the end they must serve their masters in the state government. Expect fees on hunters to keep increasing. It's a politically "quiet" way for the left to reduce the number of hunters and thus reduce their political power.
The political power that hunters have does not come from the fees they pay. It comes from their numbers at the ballot box and their willingness to financially support candidates. Don't imagine for a second that your hunting fees equate to power. It's your vote and campaign contributions that give you power.
The CPW keeps giving lip service to youth hunter recruitment and not making hunting a rich guys sport. But these new application fee and preference point fees clearly belie that lip service.
All I was saying is that I might pay $100/yr for another 3-5 point elk hunt (only). I'm too old to get another decent 20+ point hunt, so $2G isn't a consideration. $100/yr for a 3-5 point elk unit might be, especially if guys start dropping out of the points race because of the increased cost. I'll probably never buy another deer point, which should please some guys. I'll spend the 21 PP, I have, and probably not buy another deer tag. I just don't have the same passion for deer hunting. That will help me pay for a few more elk points (after I spend the 21 I have). Yes, this year's move appears to be nothing more than a "bait & switch". & I agree - I suspect a lot of hunters will also say "No, thanks", or "maybe", or drop some part of the expenditure. That's my plan ;)
This whole situation is greatly hypocritical on the part of the CPW. In not requiring the pay to play application process in order to "enhance hunter recruitment and making it more available, blah, blah blah..." and then turning around and subsequently jacking up application/ point fees that they do not have to return to the applicants, they will ultimately reduce the number of recruited hunters as previously stated. At least the old way you got your money back, right? Those buying into this being a good deal cuz now your can include your children, etc., are only being benefited this and maybe next year, then you're going to be in worse shape financially than before.... just my opinion, but it seems clear the writing is on the wall. I'm sorry, but hunting is not, nor will ever again be very cheap. Sorry Don but i find little to be positive about when we're really talking about politics these days.....
wkochevar no worried I agree! This post was also intended to be a little ironic - in that there really is not much positive to say.
One "positive" is if they raise costs to apply and build points will will get odds back down - but still likely 2x what it was before for way more $$$$
WY set the precedence and other states will follow...................
If the CPW really wants to do something positive in Colo they will switch over to all draw units for elk like they've done for muledeer. OTC elk units is a major root of the problem that we've been discussing! Converting to all draw would require hunters to burn pref pts rather than waiting to draw the few limited elk units available. Having all limited units wouldn't necessarily mean that it would take years to draw but would mandate that hunters burn vs continue to build pref pts. If you think about it there are some great muledeer units that can be hunted in Colo every year! All draw elk would eliminate a lot of problems!
I seldom hunt Colo elk any more due to the crowded conditions and poor quality hunting experience. Unlimited elk hunter numbers also make crowded conditions during the deer seasons. There's nothing more frustrating than drawing a premium deer unit have hunting with masses of OTC elk hunters! I believe it would be a step in the right direction if the CPW could actually manage the elk herd, hunter numbers, harvest, and hunting pressure....which is currently impossible in OTC units.
jims, you are right that making all units draw units would address much of the point problems. It would also eliminate a lot of the crowding by non-residents which would make residents happier. The only negative is that revenues would drop into the toilet. I don't see CP&W giving up all that non resident money.
CPW will not. In the meetings I have been to, there has been a lot of discussions about the non resident allocations being too low and the “need” to raise them to allow more non residents to draw tags. There is a fairly vocal group within CPW and several of the Sportsman’s Organizations that are all for it. Even though Colorado already has the highest nonresident allocation of any western state.
I'm guessin mainly because we have more elk than any state or province on the continent.
"If they're going to raise the pp/app fee, I just hope they do it before people get 3 points because they'll be vested and have a shot and no one will want to drop out."
And this is how and when they will set the hook! These ain't no dummies without a plan.
Dirk, you should try elk hunting in Arizona, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Nevada, or even New Mexico sometime.
Quite a bit different experience, even on easy to draw units.
Maybe even worth a little more if you like hunting with less competition for bigger bulls.
Or just drive around those states a little and count the elk versus what you see in Colorado. I know I have been very surprised by the difference and have wondered where all these elk are hiding in Colorado.
There is no wonder there are so many problems with elk spending the entire hunting season on private land in OTC units! Most of the elk have figured out years ago where the private boundaries are or are dead! Another reason Colo should limit hunters...especially on public land where elk get pounded from August through all the rifle seasons plus late cow seasons!
With all elk units going to a draw doesn't mean the CPW has to lower tag numbers! The CPW probably hasn't realized this? They could actually offer more tags than currently issued in units where they desire higher reduction of elk. As it currently stands they have little to no way of managing elk harvest or hunter numbers! Doesn't make a whole lot of sense trying to manage an elk population, hunter crowding, and harvest with unlimited tags!
jims is right. I've always imagined a full-draw-system for CO as having thousands of tags available for the units where people who want to draw every year. It's just a way of making them spend their points. It'd have to be coupled with "no buying a leftover tag if you're unsuccessful unless you burn your points."
People would hate it. Because they couldn't hunt elk and build points at the same time. But people hate the current system. So pick your poison.
The bigger problem is that for every elk tag you limit in CO, that hunter then goes to ID or MT instead and their systems can't handle another 10-20 thousand elk hunters without having the same problems.
They hide a couple miles from a road mostly. They get pressure in Colorado. Couple hundred thousand elk hunters have a tendency to make em wild. Some years we kill more elk than are in other states. But I've never killed one leanin over the hood.
I know a lot of guys enjoy hunting elk in Colo every year. I'm not quite sure why those that hunt Colo on a regular basis should't use pref pts when they draw first choice units rather than hunting PLUS building pts? All draw for Colo muledeer works super well and ever since Colo switched to all draw there has been world class muledeer hunting scattered through the entire state! Take a look at all the great muledeer options that exist throughout the entire state of Colo. The CPW finally was able to manage deer and hunter numbers in each unit separately. The quality experience increased and the quality of bucks took a giant leap!
Those that want to apply for 2nd choice deer and not burn pts still have options without loosing their pts. I really believe there are A LOT more benefits to all draw for elk than weakness! Those that have been "building points" for years and years will have a lot more options to burn their pts rather than waiting in line to draw the few limited tags that exist with the current system.
I with the crowd who thinks every elk unit should be a draw unit. Some units with very high tag quotas may never need a first choice Pt to draw and guys who don't want to build points can make that their first choice for those easy draw units. If you use a point for your first choice but not for your second or third choice, then making the easy draw unit your second choice, could preserve your PP and let you build points. But you run the risk of not hunting in CO because those easy to draw units will eventually get enough first choice applicants to draw out. CA does something like this, and it has its problems, but for deer in CA there are fewer and fewer guys with max points and the number of points to get a decent deer unit has stayed somewhat constant. So yeah, I think that all elk units in CO should be draw and you use your points on your first choice when you get drawn.
Put me in the camp to leave it as is. There is so much opportunity why piss it away? You can take all the other states, NV, AZ, UT, etc, and keep their draw systems. Local guys there are lucky to hunt bull elk once every 3 years. Some people like to hunt elk, some people hope they can hunt elk, and there are those who just like complain and by the most part, are rifle hunters.
If horns are the "final end all be all" there are other ways to make that happen beside limiting tags. If you are lazy, maybe CO isn't for you but there is a ton of opportunity at nice bulls if you're willing to work. The good thing is, you can do it every year with no luck in the draws needed.
Well on the brighter side maybe this will cause colorado to do what it should have done years ago and make all nonresidents draw only for elk? It’s overwhelming the number of people chasing elk ...and this is coming from a nonresident
Wyo has general units for both deer and elk. Wyo residents can purchase OTC tags and hunt any general unit. General and limited units are all draw for nonres. The general units are combined into regions on a draw basis for nonres with high quotas. That makes more sense than all OTC since the WG&F can actually control hunting pressure and harvest within regions for nonres.
My solution is move to wyoming where I'm guaranteed a great elk and deer tag just walking into a walmart
Pretty clever what Co F&G did.
First they make the draw so cheap that everyone and his brother applies. Now they have everyone thinking in a few years they have a chance of drawing a tag. We saw what it did to application numbers---off the chart. HOOKED.
Then they initiate a $100 point fee to the newly expanded application rolls. Genius.
The only thing I can think of hunting related that was smarter than that was the quasi environmentalist antis initiating wolf reintro programs. Not only did that seriously cut into hunting but it had the added benefit of getting us to fight amongst ourselves. That one was pure genius....Co wasn't going to top that one.
Don't underestimate em Beendare! ??
Heck, Beendare, look at all the pro-wolf propaganda out now!
They are claiming billions of dollars to the economies of the states where wolves were introduced (not re-introduced because they are a different sub species)! They claim that all this additional money is pouring into Wyoming, Montana and Idaho from all the tourists coming to see the wolves! Wildlife watching?
Seems they must be counting every person from out of state coming into that state for a vacation as well as a large portion of the residents as contributing to their estimates for “economic gain due to wolves.”
They do not subtract anything for the losses to state game departments for the lack of availability of game animals to sell licenses for nor the loss of revenue from hunters traveling, eating, staying in hotels, or using guide services.
Pretty sure the same anti-hunting group developed the study on economics of hunting, fishing, parks and “wildlife watching” that Colorado P&W used to slip their “future generations” fee increases in with.