Contributors to this thread:
Saw on another forum where the CPW, with the support of the CBA, is looking to do away with OTC tags, and extremely limit NR tags as well as move first rifle up. What's really going on in CO? Is this the precursor to the inevitable wolf introduction?
Not true. If you want the true story read this:
And the 'Fake News' hits Bowsite
I can't imagine CO giving up the cash cow that is the OTC NR license.
If they raise NR tags costs by 25% and cuts total NR tags by 20% they should have a net gain in revenue.
Thanks txhunter58. I was not sure where to start to point out how badly the OP mischaracterized things.
I can’t believe it. I can’t believe CPW picked Alternative 6- no more OTC, no more elk hunting in Colorado.
Colorado should probably limit NR elk OTC tags but that is going to be hard to do.
Let's say you own a business. You have two customers. Customer R is 25% of your income and customer NR is 75% of your income. Customer R asks you to quit doing business with customer NR. Would you quit doing business with your biggest customer NR?
Take the CPW survey here to let them know your preferences:
FYI, the option to keep otc tags. Is alternative #1.
Altetnative. #2 changes to all draw.
Alter alternatives# 3 & 4 are no longer being considered I am told.
Let your voices be heard!
Where did the original fake news come from?
Here is the CBA's written testimony to CPW. Look at the Appendixes, Alternative 5 was the best option but the PWC will not entertain any discussions of allocation at this time. They may in the future, and they need to.
Did you get the info on the CBA survey? We emailed to our members https://drive.google.com/open?id=19kqsfo_Q-qwXcT7_3EC3zuuCCd9dHbqv_PuU8_aYB60
Listen to the recording of last week's Commission meeting on the link in the linked thread on the CO forum. The Colorado Wildlife Federation really threw bowhunters under the bus. He is a ML. Grasshopper and Paul@thefort did a great job with their testimony on behalf of bowhunters.
At what time did the The Colorado Wildlife Federation speak? I would like to skip to that time...
I’ll work from this end for awhile
I heard Wyoming is going otc.
I heard Wyoming is going otc.....but you must purchase tags before January 31st..LOL!
I heard Utah will start auctioning off every big game tag to the highest bidder at the expo...... but you must me a member of $FW to participate!
Coelker, it was right after Grasshopper and Paul, following the CPW presentation. The CWF rep was Kent Ingram, former CPW Commissioner.
Here’s the link to the meeting recording.
Kent was never on the commission. He was on the license allocation working group back in 2005ish or so.
Everyone, including Kent seems to be grasping at a bowhunter particpation level of 50,000 which is totally inaccurate. Shame on CPW for putting out inaccurate data. The real numbers are 35,000 otc, and 6525 limited. There are B list cow tags, but unitl I get a report showing different, those are the same hunters and should not be double counted.
Franklin, the CPW bean counters have sophisticated models to predict the willingness-to-pay threshold. I studied it in college. They tested it with the most recent increases on residents and on the PP/WP charges. No report yet on the results, but there is no evidence anyone is looking for reasons to not spend money in CO, for anything. I so wish that were true, but its not.
WY has tested it several times recently on nonresidents and each time they raise prices, demand increases.
At the big private trout fishery I manage, we tested the threshold by raising daily fees by raising daily fees by 35%, hoping to reduce participation by 25%. Instead, participation increased.
Its psychology and perceived value.. meaning if a price of something gets raised it perceived it has more value and is worth the higher cost and is also... it actually changes supply and demand models.. for instance if the CPW was hurting for non resident hunters, they might drive the price way down to get more participants, however that might create the reverse affect as people might start thinking 'what is going on in Colorado, does hunting suck' 'I'll go to Wyoming and pay more but it must be better if it costs more' .. The reality is the CPW could drop NR allocation to 20% and increase license fees to make up the difference in revenue and still get plenty of NR's to apply or buy OTC.. But they are afraid that may not work and might go the other direction.
Lou... Colorado could save some money by using a Wyoming special draw elk tag for their “how far will elk hunters bend over” study.
Take the CPW survey here to let them know your preferences:
FYI, the option to keep otc tags. Is alternative #1.
Altetnative. #2 changes to all draw.
Alter alternatives# 3 & 4 are no longer being considered I am told.
Let your voices be heard!
I feel like saying alt 1 is keeping otc tags with no more info givin is somewhat misleading. Yes it’s otc but it’s also a shortened season with the possibility of going to partial draw only tags.
Everyone I've talked to to prefers option 2. I hope it all goes to draw
Will you change your name to limitedwill?
I'll take what we get but I won't sign off on it. Crappy "solutions" weren't necessary.
I'll change my name to Willkilloneregardless ;)
Franklin, as I said, we raised our daily fishing permit prices by 35% and now sell more than ever before. If there's a perceived value.. WY raised their NR prices way up and still have point creep, even for general tags.
I’d like to know why many would want all limited elk tags.
C’mon. Give the reasons
"If any of you have your own business try raising your prices by 25% and tell us how that is working out for you....lol "
The company I work for did just that in order to try and slow demand. Didn't work so we had to just start no bidding requests for quotes and pick out only the work we really wanted.
But elk aren't a business....they're a public resource.
Be careful what you wish for,... you just might get it..
Conrad D. circa 2002
I beg to differ Midwest. Elk, deer, sheep etc are huge business. And game departments are part of and on the front lines of this business. Unfortunately for CO the parks dept found its way in to g&f and funds are being funneled out of the dept. That's most worrisome.......
If we go 100% limited, they will likely set the tags at current numbers. That results in the same amount of folks in the woods, just less flexibility for bowhunters losing OTC. If they reduce tags enough to make a noticeable difference in pressure (say 25% - 50%?), that means a big revenue hit that needs to be made up from a smaller pool of hunters. It also means 25%-50% of bowhunters who would otherwise like to be chasing elk in CO will not be.
If they cut tags a little, we skip a year every now and then but the small trade off in pressure may not be worth what we lost.
Helping herds out isn't a factor since rifle would still be OTC and thats where numbers, bull-to-cow ratios and trophy quality are controlled.
Glunt, are you saying rifle OTC and archery all draw? How does that shake out?
Stix......Thanks for the survey info.........badbull
I can't believe they're thinking of ADDING another rifle season. There's already 4 rifle seasons. Now elk will be hunted during the rut and into the migration. This is why elk quality in CO is so far behind places like WY. The tags should be LE, the archery season in Sept, and the rifle season in Oct and give the bulls a damn break in Nov so a few of them can get older than 4.
Ambush seems like the objective of the cpw since Iv been old enough to pay attention is take from archery give to rifle.
For those that want limited archery elk ...
I went thru the 2019 stats and there are currently 16 GMUs that can be drawn with ZERO PPs.
If you want limited tags [crowding, managing hunters/etc], are you applying/hunting one of those 16 units?
Let me guess. I bet not.
"People are looking for a reason to not spend their hard earned money in Colorado..."
Maybe a couple, but not the vast majority...
Yeah, but Brad, they give out so many tags in those units in relation to the herds, that they wouldn't have many more hunters in them if they were on the OTC list...
I think the people that want all these units to be on a draw also want the amount of hunters to also be less than they currently are and that'd include the lower teir draw units.
Oops...Nevermind, I do not want to influence our current survey. My apologies.
Never hunted CO but from what I understand they manage for opportunity and not trophy class. With the hunting back east going into leases and private land the demand to hunt will outnumber the opportunity to hunt. That is why so many NR's I bet are from back east and those that didn't draw in the western states. States will always sell all their tags. Here in NM leftover tags go on sale June 26th and there are only four mobility impaired elk tags. Quite a few youth antelope tags and it seems every deer tag is an archery tag. They will sell those pretty easily. There will always be enough people to buy tags, no matter the cost. Look at land owner tags here.
Not all those units had a 100% Draw with 0 PPs. But ALL of them had a chance to draw with 0 PPs, which aligns with what Grasshopper mentioned above.
Trophyhill, if the funds from hunting revenue are being funneled out into Parks, it will be the biggest and most complex secret conspiracy in history, with hundreds of people involved in cooking the books and keeping rhe secrets, all the way to the Governor and the State Legislature.
Brad, what do you mean by that? I know the stats, but I don't understand what it really has to do with anything. You have X amount of hunters and X amount of tags. There's either too many hunters or there isn't. With more hunters and less hunting quality, the demand for the unit goes down. No matter the unit, you can increase the amount of tags available to the point that no one will want them.
Franklin, please stop calling out your fellow hunters and conservatives for ruining anything. No one's vote on this board is worth any more than a San Francisco tranny PETA vegan. Your ridiculous logic that outnumbered conservatives hold the blame for being outvoted is ridiculous, especially because it's hypocritical from you coming from a state that voted for Obama not once, but twice.
Keep in mind as any of us confidently declare how MT and WY were able to raise prices and demand increased that we are nearing the end of a 10-year economic growth cycle and the economy will get sluggish resulting in lost jobs and lower profits.
As for WY specifically, quite a few NR I know are trying to burn off their relatively inexpensively built up points the prior decade for elk and deer and then get out of the WY game except for maybe pronghorn if it stays inexpensive and can lead to a good tag in a handful of years. Of course, as the price to apply and price for points go up it is natural that someone with a lot of points does not just walk away that year but will hang around a year or two to flush the points.
Another factor for every state wanting to sell big game licenses is that the average age of the big game hunter is getting older and recruitment of youth is lagging. The decline in participation in draws over the next two decades will hit every F&G department out West.
Jaq, so maybe that was a poor choice of words. However we all know the parks dept was broke until it was merged with the CDOW. Conspiracy?
Franklin... get ready b/c I bet the preference point game is the next thing to be 'adjusted'.. it will most certainly piss a lot of people off, but nothing ever said the pp system would last forever. Actually its gonna be a little fun to watch some of these guys that have been saving points like it's their retirement plan lose their minds when the preference points system changes. I hate to tell you this, but preference points are not an 'investment', they don't earn interest and they most definitely don't guarantee anything, I mean seriously, if you've been 'saving' points for 10, 15 or 20 years, when are you planning on using them? I'll bet that unit you had your eye on 10+ years ago keeps getting further away every year with point creep.
What I mean is if archery elk goes all limited, there could be the chance not to be able to hunt each and every year.
But if you're not hunting, I guess crowding isnt an issue is it?
I’m definitely for 100 pct limited draw. Our mule deer hunting is the best in the west, both opportunity and quality because of it. If it’s structured correctly it would end point creep and create some incredible trophy hunting.
^^^ Lots more deer units than elk units
^^^ And elk are in much greater demand than deer.
The concept of draw tags for elk is for the archery tags. OTC rifle elk would remain OTC.
Thus, overall elk herd quality will continue to suffer. Although CPw does not manage for quality and tend to get very agitated when that word comes up in relation to hunting because quality of the hunt or quality of the herd means less hunters and less revenue.
CPw doesn’t want to limit their income by reducing NR cash flow. Colorado has consistently made more money on hunting license sales than any other state in the USA, according to USFW.
Making all archery tags draw would impose the R/NR split and reduce NR numbers.
All of this focus on “fixing archery” came up do to complaints about crowding in September. With muzzle loader deer and elk, early rifle elk and deer and rifle bear there are as many if not more rifle hunters in archery season. There are also a lot of non hunters in the woods in September - hikers, bikers, etc.
Based on watching the CPw’s tag allocation system, it sucks for archery. Their methods for allocating tags put 90+ percent to the rifle hunters. Many deer tags are left over for rifle hunts when it will take points to draw for archery.
No consideration for actual harvest numbers of animals killed by method is made when allocating tags, just tag numbers. If consideration of harvest success were included, archery should get more due to significantly lower numbers of animals killed.
Rifle hunters in Colorado can hunt elk in Colorado from August through January.
Treeline very good points
"What are you going to say the guys that have invested in the preference points system."
How much money have you 'invested' in preference points for elk? Just curious...Also, I'm wondering what other states you buy elk tags in, because I don't think Colorado has yet hit the magic equilibrium mark where people will stop paying higher fees for NR elk tags.
Franklin, why are you so against raising NR fees, self serving?
Boy....... considering this was "fake news", it sure did garner alot of attention.......
I just want CO to treat NRs like every other state does. If CO goes to all-draw for archery but keeps the current R/NR tag percentage in place and the same number of licenses, that would mean more resident tags available. But it would also mean a net loss of revenue to CPW of close to $4M annually.
But if "overcrowding" is the issue, then they would need to cut back on overall tag numbers in those current OTC units which now have 45-50% NR participation. It might lead to a net increase in resident tags for those units, although there's no law that says the current R/NR ratio is forever.
One of the CPW survey questions was, "Would you favor all limited even if it meant you couldn't hunt every year?" I wonder how the hunters who answered "yes" will feel when they are sitting home in September because they didnt draw elk in any other state...?
"I just want CO to treat NRs like every other state does."
I can live with that Lou....as long as the every other state comparison does NOT include New Mexico! Since I expanded my horizons several years ago, I've drawn seven tags in Colorado. Still waiting on the first New Mexico tag. Finding it a bit ironic this "fake news" thread was started by a NM resident. No offense to the OP....just sayin'....
Colorado is by far the most generous state for opportunity to hunt for all species. Not just elk.
Most other states limit NR's to 10% or less.
Colorado OTC is unlimited and most of the draw units are 35% NR. For the high demand units, there is a 20% cap on NR's, but that cap was set many years ago so there are a number of units that should be capped at 20% that are still 35% NR. Kind of crazy when you throw in the Landowner and youth allotments for tag numbers how limited Colorado Resident Hunters really are already versus any other western state.
Add to that that CPw has recently raised Colorado resident tag fees across the board and instituted payment for preference points on residents as well. Since we have to buy a separate license for every species, it hits the resident hunters pretty significantly.
CPw has, to date, made no indications that they will do anything to improve access - even to our state lands that are not accessible as they are in every other state, there has been no commitment to improve the quality of the hunt by limiting the number of hunters, no work to increase or even maintain big game herd populations through tough winters, and they absolutely do not want to limit non-resident licenses any further.
Then, we residents get the pleasure of hunting with the masses from all over the world. Not even being able to find a parking spot at some of our trailheads that we used to hunt due to the parking lot being full of out of state vehicles, losing hunting areas due to just plain overcrowding. Hordes of NR's coming in with money in their pockets leasing up land that we used to be able to hunt by putting in a little sweat equity at branding time or harvest.
Our CPw is addicted to the NR dollars and certainly does not want to lose any portion of that profit stream. Colorado makes more than any two western states combined for hunting license revenue and more than any other state in the USA. Do not expect it to get better...
I would be fine with the WY nonresident elk model - jack the price up to nearly $1000 (includes the cost of two preference points, habitat stamp, archery tag, special feeding permit) and NRs get to hunt every three years. Residents hunt every year in general units, or collect points for draw units.
I feel bad for the hunters who can't afford out of state hunts. They probably can't afford a lot of other things either. That's life. Hunting isn't welfare. Honestly, $661 for an elk license and fishing license for a 30 day hunt is a bargain. What other major skill pursuit can you do on your own for less than $25 a day for price of admission?
"Let`s not turn our sport into the sport of kings."
I agree with Franklin 100% on this. I can afford higher tag fees, but I just don't think it's right to price working class Americans out of hunting in order to reduce crowds. I believe that that will be bad for hunting long term.
Here's the thing, most F&G depts across the nation get along without a mass influx of NR funds and they manage to not go tits up. Government agencies will spend every last dollar you give them and they have to have their feet held to the fire to keep them at even a semblance of fiscal efficiency. If you doubled the money going in to CPW in 2020, by 2030, they'd be saying they couldn't get by without that money.
If CO lost some NR money and they most likely will one day no matter what they do, than they just need to tighten the belt and get by without the extra millions that NRs pump into the agency.
"What other major skill pursuit can you do on your own for less than $25 a day for price of admission?"
Hiking, mountain biking, bird watching, fishing, kayaking, swimming, sight seeing, camping, beach combing, off-roading... I could go on ;)
Everyone has their equipment, food, travel, and lodging costs. Hunters are the only ones that pay this kind of coin to the government to do what they do in the outdoors. Even the National Parks, which are by far the most heavily managed outdoor areas of the country, you can buy a pass for $80 and get your entire minivan full of rugrats into everyone of them for a year.
I gotta say I would like Wyoming’s model more if Colorado adopted it, including the outfitter welfare program
Ike, the only one of those you listed I would consider a skill pursuit is fly fishing, and that costs over $100 a year for NR licenses out here, without a chance to bring home a year's supply of meat. On my streams where the State "owns" the fish, you need a NR license and then pay me $40 a day to step in the water. And it's all catch-release.
But back to hunting..if there weren't more people willing to pay than the existing supply of harvestable animals, licenses would be cheaper. Montana lost Franklin. That nearly bankrupted the F&G but somehow they are scraping by.
We usually agree on most things. But I don't see hunters being priced out of hunting anywhere, because almost everyone can hunt their own state for cheap (except maybe NM and NV residents).
You can take your family to the carnival when it comes to town for $60, plus cotton candy, ride the ferris wheel and roller coaster and shoot the ducks to win a prize. Or you can choose to take the family to Disney World and drop a few grand. Not everyone can afford Disney World.
In my units, Wisconsin hunters seem to be the most prevalent NRs. Last time I looked, a WI resident deer license costs $24. Anyone who wants to hunt can afford $24. But a hell of a lot seem to think $661 is a bargain to come here.
If every state had elk opportunities then it might be a different picture but they don't so the demand remains high.
The long-term future of elk will hinge on development encroaching on wild land. Probably not in my lifetime but with the political climate there it could get ugly.
"You can take your family to the carnival when it comes to town for $60, plus cotton candy, ride the ferris wheel and roller coaster and shoot the ducks to win a prize. Or you can choose to take the family to Disney World and drop a few grand. Not everyone can afford Disney World."
I think the important point Lou left out here is that there is obviously a large enough supply of folks that can afford Disney World that the mouse isn't worried about where his next meal is coming from either, same with elk hunting in the west. No one has priced hunters out to the point where they aren't still lining up for tags.
Franklin, I dont care about NR fees in WI. I wouldn't hunt there if it was free. My point was that nobody is priced out of hunting in WI, no matter how poor they are, but a lot of WI hunters can afford to hunt out-of-state and are thrilled to do it.
WI is a crappy example. If you've never hunted there before they are so excited to have you that they'll only charge you half price. You see anywhere out west charging half price for elk tags to get people to come and hunt you let me know.
wisconsin aint close to what it was in the 90's for big buck production. not a top tier destination anymore.
And not to mention wayyyyy behind the times when it comes to non-res hunting license prices. Doesn't bother me a bit to pay what I pay to come out west, I wish WI would get with the times and charge accordingly as well.
The cheapest way to hunt elk in CO is to live in the midwest. The savings the other 51 weeks a year far outweighs the cost of gas and a NR tag.
Brotsky, we sell half price cow elk tags here! Its like a supermarket sale - buy a full price either sex tag, get an extra cow tag for half off.
First hunted elk in Colorado 1968. Since 1989 have been back every year. Burned all my points last year. I am out of the game and did not put in early as I have always done. Still might get OTC tag this year but Colorado has been going down hill since they put parks and wildlife together. Just my own view . Love Colorado.
First hunted elk in Colorado 1968. Since 1989 have been back every year. Burned all my points last year. I am out of the game and did not put in early as I have always done. Still might get OTC tag this year but Colorado has been going down hill since they put parks and wildlife together. Just my own view . Love Colorado.
Addressing Treeline's post about how the resident has it hard versus the nonresident: I'm not disagreeing with the way residents feel. I'd feel the same. However, the only way to fix it and have you bread too is to raise resident fee's even more. To put it bluntly, when residents start paying $660/year for an either sex archery tag for elk, I'd venture to guess that many would realize that they have it quite well in comparison. Take away the option of the B tags residents get so cheap and, it'd likely get right down ugly.
Man, I haven't checked this in a few days, comparing WI to Colorado is about the most ridiculous thing on this thread lol.
Our entire system is a joke in Colorado and the non-resident hunters, are a huge problem. Anyone who does not agree has not hunted here much or has their head in the sand. Before anyone cries, I hunt 4/5 states every year, and I sure don't expect to have the same opportunities as residents when I apply.
I'm hoping it turns into a system similar to Wyoming, but have zero faith given the park's involvement.
Once I cash out on some points, I'll be getting out of this state as fast as I can. I'll gladly pay nonresidence costs in all the western states! Anyone saying they are "entitled" to the same perks as us residents, should have to spend an equal amount of time with our overweling populations of liberals!
Nope, I wouldn't go to any state that screws me over. That's why I only hunt CO, NE, WY. AZ right now because I don't have time to hunt MT.
No real interest in whitetails. I can hunt 150"+ whitetails 15 minutes from my house but would rather hunt mature muleys in November.
I seem to recall that when MT raised the price of the elk/deer combo to a grand, they didn't all go in the draw the very next draw and there were some available as leftovers for quite some time after they became available...
So there certainly is a threshold that people won't pay. I want to hunt bison, but I don't put in for AZ based on the price of the tag - although it's more so out of protest because I'd pay that much in an auction for the tag...
Another thing, if CO goes all draw, poo hits the fan and rolls downhill and what is downhill? The other states that have OTC units: ID, OR, and WA.
Blah blah blah I said a lot
would love to hunt some of those elk that are feeding in the marijuana fields.
"Jaq you conveniently left out the fact that Wisconsin has one of the lowest non-resident tag fees and arguably some of the best deer hunting around. You were doing good until you stumbled on that point....lol"
Yeah, but their elk hunting sucks!
Couple things from where I sit
#1 Colorado HATES it resident hunters plain simple fact. The CPW hates us more and treats us worse that any other state treats its residents -period. No one can argue this fact.
The reason we receive this treatment is (this is real) due to the outfitting association along with the ranchers/special groups who tell - yes instruct - the commissioners how to vote. All the while the CBA cant even get listened to in the same room but it is the way the CPW works. Some groups are very powerful and the outfitters are the only reason colorado has not updated the units to 80-20 as mandated. Just how the CPW works.
#2 Every single archery guy I talk with believes option #2 is best for the animals as well as the hunters.
You guys that are saying that after #2 is adopted (looks like a slam dunk if votes were counted at this point but as we know the decision is already made) and Colorado goes to all draw - folks will not be able to hunt well that is the real "fake news"... If you cant find a way to hunt by drawing, landowner tags, leftovers, returns, and leftover draw well it is not the draw that kept you out of hunting but yourself. There will be plenty of tags for guys who know the system. Now if you show up to walmart the night before the season looking for a tag ya might run into a problem..
Also yes cnelk I am one of the guys who hunts a 0 point unit every year as it is much better on the quality and experience than otc... I also understand the value (congrats again on the draw) of gaining a point while hunting but IMO there are too many players to keep on that path.
Something to think about is that in the Arkansas as well as Gunny basins locals will strongly disagree on some of your OPINIONS that #2 will not help the age class of animals because moving archery elk to draw in these places sure has helped - well just according to the locals who hunt every year..
Also as I type this option #2 has the most support but if the good old CPW has taught us anything it is that they have already met with the outfitters/special interest groups and they told the commissioners how to vote so this is all academic discussion at this point.
After looking it all over I vote #2
If true it's no big deal because once they bring the wolves in there won't be any elk to hunt anyhow.
Worst unit Iv ever hunted in this state is a 1-2 point draw, has been since I was a teenager. Went back last year it still sucks worse than any otc unit Iv ever stepped foot in.
Not much to add other than CO did increase non resident tag prices by $85 this year....in the form of a small game license. Didn't seem to make much difference. Im a non resident and will hunt it as long as I can. Areas we hunt we mostly run into folks from Colorado.... but also rarely see people anyway.
This was irrelevant because we all know that no government agency will ever be fiscally responsible
they will probably make it all draw but have more tags available in the draw than were ever purchased over the counter. smoke, mirrors, crowds, money.
"they will probably make it all draw but have more tags available in the draw than were ever purchased"
Exactly. I seriously doubt they're really going to cut hunter numbers across the current OTC units. There may be a few units that get less hunters and become 0 or even 1 point units, but there's going to be units that you can draw as a second choice too.
Also, I think it's BS that they'd make archery and ML hunters on a draw and not the rifle guys. Forcing us all to burn points and control the number of hunters in the entire state.
Beef's looking better all the time!
It will take a couple years for everything to shake out if it goes all-draw. The first year a lot of people in "points no-man's land" will burn them to keep hunting OTC spots they've spent decades learning. Just like the first year deer went all draw, I burned 7 points to hunt my zero point unit because I had no choice if I wanted to hunt my plains spot. Now it has leveled out to about 60% draw with zero points (after they pulled so many tags out of the pool for outfitters to sell to NRs).
My money is on they make it all draw! They will get and extra $101.00 from NR without raising license fees. And if they aren't smoking to much pot they could triple their money by doing it too rifle seasons also then us bow hunters won't feel slighted. End game will be you just buy a leftover tag and get a point for small game license and stamp. Any bets ?
Danbow, unless they lift the NR cap imposed for draw units (which is entirely possible), they'll lose between $3-4 million per year in archery revenue. NRs make up 40-50% of the hunter numbers in many OTC units.
I don't forsee them doing anything that isn't at least revenue-neutral, so something else would have to change in a big way.
The nonres cap is only if residents use all of the 65%. My guess is if they went 100% limited they would set tag numbers high enough so that nonres revenue stays very close to current levels. That said, guessing what they will do isn't easy since their take on issues rarely lines up with an approach that makes sense to me.
I would agree that they would just set numbers higher and sell more small game licenses. And if I have to pick up my rifle to hunt elk again I will. I burned my points this year so it won't be a problem for me. It always amazes me though how most people drive-through really good elk habitat on the way to the back country and then complain about crowding when they get there. Elk are where you find them and they're not all in the backcountry
My elk draw unit has 1100 archery tags. Plus rifle bear, archery deer, muzzleloader deer, elk, and moose, high country rifle deer, grouse hunters, ATV clubs in big camps . I hunt it because it's close to home and I can scout all summer. But there are nearby OTC units with way less pressure.
I agree with Glunt, that if they go all-draw it won't affect tag numbers or availabilty in most areas, especially those with high NR participation. It will just force hunters to burn points.
If they set numbers high enough to be revenue neutral then I suspect you will be able to draw a tag with 0 points or as a second choice so it won’t really affect using points. It also won’t improve crowding
The only thing that would do that is making all elk tags draw only
Jaquomo i bet that living next to where you hunt you look at people from Denver as non -residents.I would. I live out in the country and if their not from the general area they might as well be NR. All the atv use is my peeve two hurting the elk hunting in the area that I go to
Franklin, not sure where you get that. We just want to be treated like the "elites" on every other state. Reasonable cap on NRs, unlike other states where the NR cap is 10% or less.
Gone like well y’all know who’s gone
Double edge sword. All the years they continued raising our prices and residents told us "quite whining, all the states are doing it"
But Colorado is unique in that they sell so many more NR tags than other states due to the bigger numbers of animals. And the CPW has no trouble spending the extra money that we provide. Now you want them to give up that teat that they have gotten used to suckling and they won't.
As they say, be careful what you wish for...……….
If the day comes when you don't get to hunt your normal spot or any spot due to the demand for deer tags being higher than supply, guys from non-elk states might be closer aligned to the opinions of western state residents who are concerned about resident/nonresident allocation numbers.
I certainly don't see nonresidents as intruders. I hunt other states myself. I do live in a state where getting a tag for some species and a bunch of the better units for common species is extremely hard and the demand grows each year.
Fubar, we don't like nr's either ;)
damn free grazers... I dont think any one dislikes non residents. The issue is crowding due to unlimited licenses and an inconsistent tag allocation when compared to other western states. It's not personal, just bad business.
Well maybe with the exception of a few Texans and the migration from Wisconsin every fall...
Check your PMs. Thanks.
As has been stated, we don’t hate NR’s. But the overall experience for all hunters involved Res and NR alike has become a dam circus here and we all know it! I am absolutely in favor of putting a cap on NR licenses and making it area (not unit) specific so as to evenly disperse the pressure a bit. I am definitely on the side of the fence who agrees that resident hunters should be taken care of in their home state. I don’t expect to go to Wyoming and be treated with otc Gen tags as a NR. I think they are smart in maintaining the quality of the hunt rather than trading it in for a greedy quantity. The years I do get to hunt there, I appreciate the management.
Maybe you should vote the politions out...they are the ones screwing yall.Its not the N.R.We just hunting on land we help manage. Sounds like finger should be turned around....Go Vote.
Turkeybuster, which politicians are establishing CO season structure and license allocations? You might want to learn something about our state and how policies are set before weighing in on the topic.... Sheesh...
The people that structure your allocations must have just walked in and took over then.somebody put them in office...start there.then work your way down.its not the n.r that make up your laws.its residents,y'all put up with this crap,,,but blame the n.r....with out us.your state would have to go up on your lic..and your tax to pay for what our money helps your state do.
tURKEYBUSTER, (purposely posted that way...), have another shot of 'shine.
The Wildlife Commission is an appointed Board representing sportsmen, anglers, park users, outfitters, ranchers, general public. Revenue is king. They are appointed by the governor. Fewer than 2% of Colorado residents are hunters so all of us could vote one way and it wouldnt make a spitball worth of difference. Do the math. As long as NRs are willing to pay to come here for crappy elk hunting, they will continue to sell you as many cheap elk tags as you want to buy. You're right, if they cut NR tags back they would need to raise NR prices to stay close to what other states charge us - and you - to hunt elk. I so wish that would happen but NR elk cash is like heroin to Parks and Wildlife.
Let's not talk about who residents voted for - YOU voted for Hank Johnson and elected him over and over, a brain-dead idiot who believes Guam will "tip over" if a military base is built there.
WTF. Is this the new landing spot for the old CF posters?
^^^ Yep. Was thinking the exact same thing Brad!
They had to go somewhere Brad
Wow, Jaquomo, less than 2% of CO residents are hunters? That is amazing. And very bad news.
So HedgeHunter made me check. According to USFWS hunting license sales data.
CO has about 235,000 resident hunters and 55,000 NR hunters.
Resident hunters spend $12.6 million and NRs pay $42.2 million on their licenses, tags, etc.
(CO is about 4% licensed resident hunters; CA is 0.7%; MD is 1.7%; VT is 10.4%; didn't check the others)
That 235,000 is not all voting age adults. The state has about 5.7M TOTAL people, including kids and babies. They sell 490,000 licenses to residents (including small game, and youth tags), but almost all residents buy more than one license. So if you take out youths and factor in multiple licenses for the adults, its a very low overall percentage. .
Then figure that the percentage is way higher outside of the Front Range, which controls the vote for the whole state, and hunters don't amount to any sort of meaningful voting bloc.
TBM or I guess maybe TB now may be a pain in the A but at least he was good for some cheap entertainment.
USFWS data, last report I read was hunters & anglers who live here, but hunt in or out of state. The true headcount number is about 507,000 Colorado resident habitat stamp buyers.
CPW says in many reports there are 50,000 archery elk hunters. That is licenses sold. True number is 41,500 headcount but that is ressy and non ressy. We probaly have 22kish resident archery elk hunters
I believe jaqs number at 2% for elk hunters is pretty close. 1-10ish buy habitat stamps.
In states on a limited draw, the non resident tags are not priced too high if all the allocated tags are drawn anyway. Not the same as raising your price 25% in a normal business setting.
Residents do in fact rent hotels, buy gas, food/drink, etc.
I buy food, gas and...well...about everything in Colorado since I live here all year. Most Coloradoans drive as many miles in state as a nonresident does during season. Some are lucky enough to hunt the mountain at the edge of town but many drive 4+ hours to their newest secret spot.
Not to mention, residents pay property taxes, which pay for many of the roads, trails, and other public services that NRs use and enjoy when they come here.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the $$ that tourists and outdoorsmen spend in Colorado. I just wish there weren't so damn many of them.
I have no stake and zero standing as a non-resident. I'm good with whatever you guys decide as a group of resident bowhunters. It will be a bummer if you get run over by the rifle/muzzleloader guys if they want to punish you, as it appears in a couple of the scenarios described above.
Withe Advent of trail cams, I'm sure residents spend a boatload more on trips across the stAte then nr.
How many 40-50 year old NR Colorado elk hunters do you know? How many 18-28 year old NR Colorado elk hunters do you know?
Most of us got in the game when elk hunting was affordable. I’ve tried getting my nieces and nephews to come along... not sure the $600-$700 tag cost is the only thing stopping them... but it ain’t helping.
I’m afraid cp&w will go back to a dry well when the older NR find something else to do or plain get too old.
Me. I’m planning on elk one year and deer the next. Does Idaho still have some otc?
You are probably right Bruse. Given another 20 years, states may be crying for NR hunters. Heck, Colorado already is advertising to try and lure hunters back. They lost about 30,000 elk hunters already due to price and other factors.
Franklin, you are comparing apples to oranges. Texas has around 600,000 resident hunters, but we also have 4 million deer! Can't compare that to a state like Colorado that has aprox 200,000 elk and 400,000 deer. To look at it another way, you can hunt deer in Texas for aprox 3 months straight. I shoot 3-4 deer/year myself and yet that doesn't hurt the population of game. If they did that in Colorado, there would not be any game left.
Nonresident tags in all states are too cheap.
"Understanding how lobbying and special interest groups work in molding legislation would help".
Duh, we're just a bunch of illiterate rubes that fell off a beet truck when it was driving through the state on I-70. How could we possbly understand such complicated processes?
The "minuscule" number of resident hunters in Colorado may not control policy, but they and their neighbors certainly do with their votes. Have you noticed what kind of neighbors most of us Colorado hunters are getting, lately? If not, I'll provide a clue. They aren't friendly to hunters, regardless of their resident status, or not.
Unless resident and NR Colorado hunters can come to a solution that's agreeable to all, we will continue to lose policy making influence and power, and we all will ultimately lose.
CO doesn't need NR hunters to manage our herds of 10 species. CO needs NR hunters to fund the machine, CPW.
The only thing that will keep the wolf at bay is the NR money.
3 arrows, are NRs going to fund the "Stop The Wolf" media campaign before the 2020 election? Nope.
Tell me where to send money. I already sent $100.
Thanks Txhunter. The Stop The Wolf coalition is still getting organized. At this point we're a long way from any campaign.
"The only thing that will keep the wolf at bay is the NR money." That NR is just pouring into Idaho, MT, Wyoming, WA & OR to solve their wolf problem now, ain't it?
On the wolf, according to WAFWA, AZ has spent 32 million on their 150 or so Mexican wolves. Either WA or OR spent 16 million in one year on nonintroduced wolves. Revenue will go way down when elk herds have no more appeal, all wildlife will lose.
Solve that one for us Franklin, good thing NR's can vote in our elections, right?
Thanks Txhunter. The Stop The Wolf coalition is still getting organized. At this point we're a long way from any campaign.
Working on a donate now button for the CBA on the wolf ballot intiative, might be a couple months.
if you are interested in the Wolf issue, google search, Colorado ballot initiative 79 to read what is being proposed.
NOW, and this is important, this Initiative 79 is being replace by another wolf initiative with different wording. I have not seen the updated version yet.
Also check out Stop The Wolf Coalition website. The CBA has donated $500. and the Coalition is asking all elk/deer/etc hunters to donate at least $25.
I think I’m almost done deleting
Arrogance is easy to read
Take the plank out of your own eye.
Someone made Bowsite great again
I do still think he would have been a lot quieter in person
Franklin, I am a NR, and don't always agree with how things are handled in CO, but the people there are some of the best I have ever met. And they have as much right to their opinion as you and I do. It is not all about right and wrong, black and white. And I have trouble understanding how grown ups get behind a computer and revert to how they treated people in Jr. High. Why? Because they can get away with it without consequences. When people act like that, I stop listening to them, on both sides. Bottom line is I am not sure what you think you are accomplishing here, but I for one have stopped listening to your opinion. I am sure that means nothing to you, but I am sure I am not the only one, so if you just enjoy the fray, then have at it, but you are accomplishing nothing. We as NR have VERY little power, and alienating those that have some isn't the way to make it better for us. JMO.
Nobody tougher than a keyboard cowboy. Franklin sounds like one bad dude
Wow franklin, your popular everywhere you go! Just ignore him guys and he'll go away.
How about providing some factual data proving "hardcore conservatives" aren't spending money hand over fist in Colorado?
What we have here is Franklin's Alternative Reality.
I think this might be the last one
Eh. Franklin will be spending his hard earned money on a $670 NR elk tag in a few months and then go back to bashing the state he travels halfway across the country to hunt. All the while the state he lives has voted blue 4 out of the last 5 election years. People forget that Wisconsin’s capital city is every bit as liberal as Colorado’s. The way Franklin talks, you’d think he was from a perennial red state like Alabama.
Man I put a lot of time into trolling the all knowing
I used to think CO raising tag fees would lesson participation. And, I think it would have if other states weren’t so much more expensive to the NR. But, with that in mind, I don’t see that happening. Unless it got ridiculous
The biggest issue with less NR participation is the resident hunter picking up the bill. I realize it’s not an issue for many of you guys. But, the resident hunters having to pay a substantial fee increase due to limited NR participation by policy, are going to be the ones complaining.
Bottom line is, if a few NRs drop out because the state raises tag fees...the state still makes more $$$ on fewer NR tag sales. NR participation would have to drop substantially for the tag increase to result in negative cash flow....and that's not likely to happen. It is what it is....and all the NR complaining in the world isn't going to change it.
I promise to play nice at least for awhile
I’m going to assume you two guys realize you are stuck on one way of looking at it. While Us complaining NR’s are looking at it from another.
Let me clarify one thing. I’m not complaining. I’m simply talking. I’m coming elk hunting if there is a tag no matter what resident doesn’t want me too. I could care less that it pisses you or anyone of your fellow residents off.
If you have a formula that is revenue neutral, take it to your legislature and commissioners. And do your lobbying to them. Don’t get pissed because a NR doesn’t share your beliefs that the CO legislature is going to dismiss the number 2 source of income, when setting new game laws.
I’m not trying to be mean. But, I wasn’t trying to be a wise guy when you two posted last either. I truly don’t care who does or doesn’t like the way things are and, the way they be. As long as I can go hunting.
"I would be fine with the WY nonresident elk model - jack the price up to nearly $1000 (includes the cost of two preference points, habitat stamp, archery tag, special feeding permit) and NRs get to hunt every three years. Residents hunt every year in general units, or collect points for draw units."
I'll second this, Lou.
Regardless of cost, I'm hunting elk somewhere whether I can afford it or not. You see? I am a junky. And I need a fix regardless of what the price is ;)
""I would be fine with the WY nonresident elk model - jack the price up to nearly $1000 (includes the cost of two preference points, habitat stamp, archery tag, special feeding permit) and NRs get to hunt every three years. Residents hunt every year in general units, or collect points for draw units.""
Actually, Wyoming Residents do not collect elk PPs. Elk thru the drawing is random
I'd gladly pay 3 times the price for resident tags, if the trade-off was a 20% reduction in NR tags, especially in the heaviest used units.
Somethings gotta give.
After reading through all this i have a decided to speak up for NRs too. Colorado hunting land is 68% Federal land. That said, residents seem to want to limit NR numbers to 20% or less yet jack the prices so that resident license fees don't go up. How would you feel if NRs demanded that residents pay the same price as we do. According to one post its truely a bargain at $661 for a 30 day opportunity at elk. Well let me go a little deeper. A NR usually spends 4x times that on the trip alone, yet we are hunting during a weeks vacation so you usually get 5 decent days hunting in taking out travel time. We stop at gas stations, grocery stores, sporting goods and etc. This is to hunt public/federal land. Most NRs don't get to scout and their success rate is probably 1/4 that of a resident. Most come out and are content just to spend time with friends enjoying beautiful country. Most of the residents that post here have enjoyed success by hunting elk by knowing where they go by pressure, remove that and elk could scatter and change. Quality will not go up if rifle seasons aren't changed too. But wait, once archery otc is removed rifle will soon follow. I know as a NR if im forced to find a tag elsewhere then learn a new hunting area i would be less prone to return as Franklin points out. Looks as though thats the objective of many residents tho. If you want it to yourself then who's being greedy, y'all should pay the same as NRs have to hunt public land.
Tx, the fact that it is federal land is irrelevant. You pay CO to hunt not access the land. You can go hike the federal land in CO for free.
If there is power in numbers then why are so many voting to drop otc
TxHuntr, sounds like you are being the greedy one. Why aren't you ripping the residents of states that deeply discriminate against NRs?
In WY, you can only hunt "OTC" (general) units every three years, and are banned from hunting federal land without a guide. You pay close to 40% more than in CO. Why not tear into all those evil, greedy WY residents who want it all to themselves?
"A NR usually spends 4x times that on the trip alone...
I'd put my resident hunting expenses up against your NR expenses, any day. My guess is I spend as much, if not more than you, even with the difference in tag costs. Add to that the property taxes I pay, which funds many of the roads, trails, fire/police departments, and other public amenities that we all use, and I'm quite sure I spend more than you.
Do you not think residents of any state should enjoy certain opportunities over non-residents?
Matt we pay taxes here too. Im talking actual hunting trip costs. My actual 5 days worth of hunting in Co. cost me on average $2500 per trip or $500 per day. Don't think your spending that per day as resident. Im not totaling what i spend per year hunting.
WV Mountaineer - To be clear, I'm a NR bowhunter in Colorado as well. Just been living with the fact most states raise tag prices pretty regularly as long as I've been participating. Used to complain quite a bit myself, but finally figured out my complaining was just wasted time and energy.
I have been on bare bones trips where i got by on $1300 or so. Normally i bring a couple horses and a mule. They require vet paperwork, farrier work, extra fuel trailering, feed, trailer needs etc. But that adds to local economy.
Something else i haven't seen mentioned in this whole thread is elk numbers vs over crowding???? Appears that its hunters against hunters more than an issue of over harvest due to numbers of hunters.
Why would you assume I don't spend $500 a day on a resident elk hunting? I travel 6-7 hours to where I hunt, and back, often 3-4 times a season. I have the exact same travel, food, and lodging expenses per day as you do. I pay the same sales taxes on all of those things as you do. I take time away from work and other obligations...just like you do. Furthermore, I hunt a minimum of 4 big game species in Colorado every year, so multiple my hunting expenses by 4.
Yes, we all pay taxes, but we are talking about who benefits from those local and state taxes. When you come to Colorado, you enjoy the public services and amenities that MY taxes have paid for. If Texas had anything I wished to travel there for, I'd enjoy your state on your tax dollars. But it doesn't, so I don't.
If i figured time from work it would go up more too. If your spending $500 a day to hunt locally then theres something wrong. I spend maybe $50 a day to hunt local. This appears to be an effort to push NRs out yet increase tag prices to offset. In Texas we have limited public land and its mostly state owned. If you put in to draw there is no discrimination wether resi or NR. Our NRs tags aren't 20x that of residents either. Just saying if herd numbers are stable why change the otc system? Who benefits?
Ok, first of all, hunters coming into the state ain't dropping no 2500.00 to 3000.00. Most are diy guys and come here as cheap as possible, most dropping around 1100.00. Do your research and you'll find that skiers are dropping more monies into the Colorado economy then hunters. Resident hunters are tired of the pressure from the boom of non resident hunters. When you have 150 local bowhunters but see over 3000 non resident bowhunters hunting less then 19000 elk in three game management units, most of which is private, you see the issue.
Now, the nr hunters think their monies is all going into wildlife management, but do your research, make your phone calls,many you'll find that less than 10% of all monies made by CPW go to wildlife management. They only spend the amount set by law, not one penny more. Most of your monies go to parks, for non hunters and hikers to enjoy. Ever wonder why the dow officers drive trucks with over 200,000 miles and batteries held in place with bungee straps?
Yes, several emails and suggestions made to CPW to have nr otc licenses with caps. We heard all the arguments why it wouldn't happen, but it came down to money. The suggestion to increase tag fees for both resident and non resident, but CPW heard nothing they wanted to hear.
Basically, we are either going to have split seasons or all elk tags will be a draw. And yes, some resident bowhunters won't be chasing elk every year.
I learned a lot from this thread:
Franklin is a jackwagon and is making bowsite less fun.
CO residents have legitimate gripes with unlimited elk tags being sold to NRs.
NRs are mostly looking at CO as their "safe state" where if we don't draw somewhere else we can go hunt CO as our backup plan. (I'm a NR)
Lastly, Colorado's DPW makes 74% of their income from NRs and it unlikely that the DPW will limit NR elk tags because it would cut their own budget.
"If your spending $500 a day to hunt locally then theres something wrong."
It's not about the per day amount. Residents and NRs can hunt elk equally cheaply or expensively as they wish. We all have the same expenses, minus the difference in tag costs. Not all Colorado residents have elk wandering around in their back yards.
For me, it all comes down to the quality of the hunt, and whether or not residents of any state should be afforded more opportunity to quality hunting than non-residents. I say they should. Not just in Colorado, but in any state.
Colorado's OTC elk system gives equal opportunity, regardless of resident status, in 137 of 184 of the state's elk units, which encompasses the vast majority of elk habitat in the state. Think about that for a moment.
Residents do enjoy better chances at limited areas, due to tag allocations, but that only applies to a relatively small amount of land and overall hunter numbers. Otherwise, resident hunters have no more opportunity than NRs. That should not be the case in any state, IMO.
On the contrary elkstabber. If all had the same point of view, it would not be much fun around here and it may as well be a bunch of liberals posting because they all think alike......
First and foremost I would like to see all recreational users held to some financial responsibility. Park pass, Parking pass, seasonal, daily, annually, etc... Its a sh*t show to know the minority users are supporting the majority's use nearly 100%.
Matt i understand that it may cost you more than some other residents but on average resident vs NR its gonna cost NRs 4x more to enjoy the hunting experience in Co. Its 16 hours one way for me. I set my vacation almost a year in advance. Im there that week regardless of weather conditions, rut activity, crowding factors etc. Its that way for most all NRs. As i said earlier its more about the experience. To me public land is public land regardless of what state its in. I have turned in others for trashing it up and try to leave my area cleaner than i found it. It's the people ive met, Cullen and Bill come to mind. They have been coming to the same spot for over 40 years. They are in their 80's and last year we didn't see them. You just pray they were still healthy and wonder if they were coming later. That leads me to wonder how many residents aren't really just transplants that moved there because of the allure of Colorado.
How far you travel, and how much you spend, to enjoy Colorado's resources is irrelevant. That's a function of where you choose to live and hunt. I choose to live, hunt, and pay taxes in Colorado, and I feel that should entitle me to more quality hunting opportunities in Colorado than NRs.
And, again, public land has nothing to do with this conversation. You are free to use Colorado's public land in any legal way, just like I am. When you purchase a Colorado hunting tag, you are paying for the privilege to hunt a resource that is owned and managed by Colorado. You aren't paying to use the public land.
Matt you have valid points but you don't see what im fighting for. By losing otc and knowing that if theres an increase in non resi fees this quickly becomes a playground for the rich.
I understand what you are fighting for. You are fighting for equal opportunity to enjoy Colorado's resources as much as residents do.
I also understand the concern about hunting becoming a hobby for the rich. Unfortunately, that's the economic reality of supply and demand of a dwindling resource. IIRC, Colorado's population has roughly quadrupled in my lifetime. While elk populations have remained fairly stable recently (according to the CPW, I don't buy it), it's just a matter of time when population growth will deplete elk habitat and numbers. And the cost to hunt in Colorado will continue to climb.
TxHuntr, why aren't you going after WY, MT, NM, AZ, and UT as "playgrounds for the rich"? Why should CO be the defacto "open border" welfare state for all the poor and unwashed?
"By losing otc and knowing that if theres an increase in non resi fees this quickly becomes a playground for the rich."
That myth has been debunked by all the other western states.
Somewhat ironic that a person from the land of $5,000 high fence "cull" hunts is bitching about the cost of a NR Colorado license.... Tags what, $650? Raise it to $1,000. That equates to roughly $7 a week extra. Maybe not get the latest and greatest from SitkaKuiuFirstLite and put it towards the tag.
As far as Colorado residents hating NR's.... Ain't seeing it. This will be my first year elk hunting and lets just say if I am successful and actually put a bull on the ground,any pictures of this successful hunter would actually require a group photo. Cuz Colorado has some damn fine residents!
Thank you, Tom. I'd gladly jump into that photo, if you feel Im deserving.
Thanks, Tom. I mentor several "newbie" nonresidents every year. I'm a nonresident in every other state I hunt, and deeply appreciate all the help freely offered to me by residents of those states.
I wonder if the all knowing could read the mind that proofed him
Franklin and Fubar would have fit right into the Community Forum.
Look guys, this isn't about greed, or hunting revenues, or harvest statistics. This is all about whether or not residents of a state should have more opportunities to enjoy the hunting resources of their state over NRs. I say they should.
If NR hunters want to have those same opportunities in Colorado, they are free to move here and help pay for the publicly funded services and amenities that residents provide. In fact, I'd love to see fellow hunters move here and displace some of the hoards of anti-hunting liberals that are invading this state.
Until then, be grateful for the opportunity to enjoy Colorado resources, at whatever expense and limitations we residents choose to impose. I will do the same in your state.
Lower NR fees to $300 or less for elk but limit NR with caps or draws or whatever cpw feels fit.
What would happen? Would I get to go to Colorado every??? Second or third year?
Elk one year. Deer the next. Then Idaho the third. Repeat.
I might actually get a young niece or nephew to come along. ... I would cover the transportation cost just to get them to go....
Now unneeded trolling post
I think most Colorado resident hunters are willing to fund any shortfall in budgets, if they are rewarded with better, less crowded, Colorado hunting. Whether it be thru increased resident tag fees, or taxes. Colorado's challenge is to get the majority of voters to realize their hunting resources are one of the most valuable assets their state owns, and it's not an unlimited resource.
Any interest in considering the effect of lowering fees but limiting otc?
Interestingly, the biggest line items that they claim as required expenditures are dams and fish hatcheries.
Water is gold in the west and the water rights sales more than pay for any dams that are currently in existence.
Interesting that all resident hunting licenses went up by at least $8 plus fees for points and required purchase of a small game tag while fishing licenses only went up $8. Kinda fishy math...
But it makes sense to bureaucrats when CPw touts their study that says “wildlife watching” brings $2.9 billion to the state with camping and fishing second and third with hunting only worth about $9 million. Where are all these “wildlife watchers”? Certainly don’t see people making vacation plans to come to Colorado just to watch wildlife anywhere! The purpose was to make hunters pay their fair share - and give more political weight to the animal rights people that only “watch” wildlife.
Franklin thinks he knows far more about Colorado's hunting politics than we residents do. He's sadly mistaken.
Managing Colorado's wildlife resources to balance hunting quality, opportunity, and corresponding budget's will always remain a good problem to have, as long as the resources exist. Many states don't have that luxury.
LOL. As a hunter, you should realize that state wildlife resources are something state residents ultimately have control over. We can look for as much NR support for those resources as we please.
Instead of alienating yourself from resident's points of view, you might try putting yourself in our shoes. As a 57 yr. old native of Colorado, who's hunted here all of his life, I think I've earned the right to have my opinion about Colorado hunting. What are your qualifications, Franklin?
What is they say about arguing with an idiot?
Totally wrong about budgetary shortfalls. We just had a fee increase, we just saved 3 million a year on pay later, we just upped application fees for both the primary and secondary draw. Franklins facts are totally wrong. Future generations was to generate something like 26 million a year.
These numbers are JUST ELK
We haven't lost any hunters. Sure it fluctuates with herd size and license limitation, but contrary to Franks statements, participation is alive and well. We have a whole country to pick from as far as NR's go.
"As a non-resident hunter who has hunted Colorado for his entire life I feel I have earned the right to have an opinion about non- resident hunting in Colorado. What are your qualifications to speak on the NR hunting license situation Matt?"
I live here, and I fund many of the public services and amenities you enjoy when you visit and consume our state-owned resources. Next question.
No one is raising fees....It took 3 years in the legislature to get a resident fee increase. The legislature does not want to hear jack squat about CPW fee increase for YEARS. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!
What will happen is cost of living increase for everyone, it is in the law. Additionally, they can tack on preference point fees for every species at their own commission discretion. It will happen sooner or late. They also create new licenses and permits in the existing CRS and charge up to $100. Expect an "access permit" when we launch the access program.
Why argue or debate something that just isn't going to happen?
If the cpw is independent of the state then what amenities do NR’s enjoy on your dime? Gravel roads, cops, firefighters, infrastructure? Beyond that everything, including sales tax, comes out of the NR’s pockets. What are these amenities I am missing, I feel left out.
Franklin. I suggested that it would be a great idea to bring NR elk license prices in line with NM and WY, which by the time a NR can draw, is in the $1000 range. CPW won't do it, as grasshopper explained.
I still think it would be a wonderful idea and it wouldn't shock anybody. WY and NM still sell every NR elk license available. There is no evidence that hunter numbers would drop, just as there is no evidence that "hard core conservatives" are avoiding Colorado at all. Ok, maybe like a dozen nutjobs stay away, and if it keeps you away that's a strong positive, but CO tourist revenue sets new records every single year.
Whoa guys i am not complaining about prices at all. I am in agreement with Matt and others that CoDoW is giving residents a raw deal. I can hunt every species available in my home state each year for $68. Just one species cost Colorado residents that much. I was referencing what most NRs spend to come to Colorado for the privilege to get to hunt elk that aren't available in every state. This brings in a lot of revenue outside of actual cost of tags. Yes residents spend money just the same but if you live there you gonna spend money on every day existence regardless. When i pull into Alamosa Colorado and spend 2k on tags, food, and supplies thats money from a source only generated by my desire to be there to hunt elk. I stop and buy certified weed free hay for my horses and other items my stock needs from the feed store. Im not complaining about cost at all, just reiterating the fact that if non residents quit coming businesses suffer.
It bothers me that some residents think that its more important to push away hunters that help carry the cost of conservation with the idea it will help the quality of hunting for a smaller percentage of those wanting to enjoy a resource. When i first started hunting Colorado i befriended some locals that hunted otc rifle. They welcomed us with open arms and were very nice. They hunted plateaus and did drives. It wasn't our type of hunting but they hunted to fill the freezer and did what worked for them. We started coming during archery season to avoid being in the area during their drives. We eventually moved to a new area that was mostly wooded and had success. In due time we started dealing with a different dilemma. Local families came in and had multiple camps full of male archery hunters. Their hired packer would bring in other family members with tags to bring out elk meat while the male hunters continued to hunt. Again they where filling their freezers and prolly needed the meat for existence. I'm not the judgemental type but seen the resources being exhausted so we moved to a new area once again. The very first time we pulled into the new trailhead it looked like a tent city, yes it is crowded but we have not had the first problem there in the past four years. Colorado has the same issues as most other states. I know the game wardens are way under staffed and doing the best they can. I just know that once a privilege is lost you can't get it back. Removing archery otc tags isn't the answer to the monetary problem. It may change whats on license plates parked at the trailhead but wont alleviate crowding either. Like someone else pointed out, same hunters there, draw a deer tag one year, bear next, then elk. Most will still be there one way or another.
I respect all my fellow hunters opinions and feelings. I hope it doesn't look as though i was looking for an arguement. I still believe there is power in numbers and hunters should work together regardless where we live. Once were divided were conquered. I have enjoyed reading many posts from guys on here for a long time. Jag, cnelk, apauls, charlie rehor, midwest, bigdan, mule power, even the turkeyhamblaster and would share camp with any of them or a cup of coffee/cold beer. God bless
The elk herd in NM is an estimated 70k animals. CO I believe it's somewhere between 2 & 300k animals. Not sure what WY is. Not sure why anyone would be for raising prices to fall in line with NM price gouging. I'd like to see our state fall in line with CO pricing including resident pricing although I know that won't happen unfortunately.
On another note, who am I to complain about how another state manages it's game? I'm sure Roosevelt would be just fine with how states are managing their game per his NA model.
Grey Ghost's Link
Looks like franklin went................................................--POOF!-- ;-)
Some interesting statistics on OTC elk hunting in Colorado in this article.
1. Total state-wide elk population including limited units - 282,000
2. Total OTC elk hunters- 223,269
3. 57% of all elk hunters hunted in OTC
4. 27% of all elk harvested came from OTC units.
5. Success ratios in OTC : Archery - 9.4%, Rifle 2nd Season - 8.6%, Rifle 3rd Season - 6.9%
So, if you subtract the number of elk in the limited units from the total, there were far more hunters than elk in the OTC units over the course of all the seasons. And no method of take had over 10% success ratio.
Tell me, again, how nothing needs to change with OTC hunting?
Actually, statewide first rifle success rates in the last 5 years ran 23 to 30%. That season is totally limited.
I think your statistic clearly demonstrated how a limited draw improves the quality of the hunt. OTC success ratios are embarrassing.
That was hard to read here is 2016, given to CBA from CPW.
Grey Ghost, Andy Holland had a slide comparing OTC archery to limited. The success rate difference was a couple percent, not much But that is archery.
The big change to me is success between 1st rifle and 2nd. We get accused of moving elk. What the data shows is elk move to refuge when they hear rifles booming. 2nd and 3rd rifle success drops.
Ok #1 I apologize to all that suffered through me trolling the all mighty franklin, I edited and deleted those posts at least I hope I got them all. #2 I’m absolutely pro leave it alone on this issue. I feel like harvest rates are low enough to not have a huge impact on herds and it’s a fun time to be in the woods. And it’s still possible to get away from crowds in the otc units. #3 it looks like that’s not going to be considered so my next best would be draw but think cutting the season in half is stupid. #3 I really wish people would quit trying to change the world it really seems every time a change is made it makes things worse for the majority.
I've hunted OTC for the last 21 years while I racked up PPs. If my memory serves me, I've killed 6 bulls in that time frame. So, I guess I've done a little better than average, but still not very impressive.
I hope to dump my 21 points in 2020 on one of the more coveted trophy units. It will be interesting to see, first hand, the quality difference between OTC and limited hunting.
Good luck Matt that will be an awesome experience for you!
Also keep in mind as you look at those numbers, that is NOT a hunter number. That list includes B list cow tags. We do not have 47,000 elk bowhunters. We have 35,000 OTC hunters, 6525 limited licenses, and B list cow tags for both OTC and limited units.
We have asked CPW to look at B list licensing schemes and their contribution to crowding, and give us a report but is really hard to get data like that.
I was spoiled early on in my bow-hunting career. We had access to privately land-locked BLM with very little bow hunting pressure. Back then, it wasn't a matter of if we would kill, just a matter of when. My group of 3 bow hunters went 100% for several years In a row. As with all good things in life, that changed when the ranch changed hands.
It was a real eye-opener when I started hunting OTC. I just couldn't believe hunters would travel thousands of miles to experience the circus we call OTC hunting. The crowding has gotten progressively worse since then, from my perspective.
But, I really can't complain. I've experienced some of the best elk hunting Colorado has to offer. I just feel bad for some of the younger hunters, like my 32-year old buddy who I taught to bow hunt. He'll never live long enough to experience Colorado's best elk hunting under the current system, unless he dishes out the dough for a private hunt.
I’m 31 so right in that area, admittedly Iv not been on a ton of archery elk hunts but always luck into one with a death wish Iv been 100% successful on cows in otc. Only killed one bull but that was with a rifle. Last year I spent 33 days in the woods between my hunts and hunting with my buddy. We ran into 1 guy in the woods and he was on the main trail. Once we got back to the road it was a circus for sure but I figure if guys want to hunt where it’s easy that’s what is going to happen. I know it is getting harder to get away from people but it can be done still.
Fubar, nice work brother. I've never killed a cow, but I've been tempted several times. The idea of killing several generations of elk, by killing one cow, just wouldn't allow me to pull the trigger. But that's just my self-impose rule. I don't begrudge other hunters who take cows. It all looks the same in the freezer, right? ;-)
Heck, you're just a puppy. At your age, there was nothing that would stop me from getting away from the crowds, either. At 57, I'm not quite as spry these days. I can still cover a lot of ground, but the motivation has waned a bit.
I understand that my ole man is about your age with 100% medical disability according to the doctors you wouldn’t know it looking at his work ethic though. But he does struggle to get around the elk woods he doesn’t have the success rate I do but he does ok for himself. One of the things that I hate about the changes they are looking to make is the possibility of not being able to hunt with him every year anymore. As far as the cows go I fully understand your point of view the area I hunt they’ve been trying to knock the cows down in a big way for years multiple thousands of cow tags given out every season, so that’s the main reason I don’t worry about taking cows in that area.
As a non-resident, I love being able to go to Colorado and just buy a tag. I other than a couple general tags in Wyoming, I haven't managed to draw anything , and believe me, I've tried.
Without Colorado, I would hardly ever get to hunt elk....cant afford to buy landowner tags.
All that said, if I was a Colorado resident, I would not be happy. It's a bit of a circus out there.
I dont blame any of you residents for wanting a change. I would too.
IMO - when a person consistently kills elk in Colorado OTC areas is a just really good 'foreplay' for when you draw LE units.
Like I mentioned before, this year was my 27th year of applying for elk PPS, and Im going to be hunting my 3rd LE unit - Unit 10, unit 61, and this year unit 49. All the while killing elk almost every year hunting in OTC
Wow. I said my piece and didn’t visit this thread again for a few days. Looks like the troublemaker imploded which was predictable and needed. I refuse to feed the troll.
Txhuntr: the thing you are not factoring in is that the STATE owns wildlife. That is true in Texas and all all other states. Doesn’t matter if they are on federal land, state land, or private. We may not like that all the time, but it is the law of the land. So the state gets to decide who hunts and for how much. Whatever else we do, we have to understand and accept that because that won’t change.
I now have a cabin in CO and will retire in a few years so I could change my residency to CO but I won’t. Just the increase in taxes (income tax, etc) would cost way more than I would save on an elk tag. So there are trade offs.
And I can pretty much afford whatever they decide to charge for a tag, but have seen multiple friends stop going due to the cost. It IS becoming a rich mans game and that is what I hate the most.
Do you hit the back button on your phone after?
Your double tap is faster than you think. ;-)
Colorado residents definitely pay a premium to live here. Non-resident hunting revenues is a drop in the bucket compared to state and local taxes. That should entitle resident hunters to enjoy Colorado's hunting resources more than NRs. Same goes for any state.
I thought the game department was funded without state tax dollars?
That must be it. It is always on my phone when the double post occurs! Doesn't happen on the computer.
Believe it or not, I personally now pay over $2000 in property taxes in Colorado. But worth every penny!
Teeton suggested a bunch of us PA Boys skip our annual early season deer hunt here and head West for some OTC Elk action. We usually get close to 50 hunters for our early season hunt, so I bet we could put that Wisconsin gang to shame! ;-)
I love the state of Colorado. I have had a ton of really good elk hunts there going back to the 1990's and that has been mostly in OTC units. We hunted every single year for decades. I will be the first one to say....it's not as good as it used to be....more pressure, a lot less OTC since back then, but it's still a great place to hunt.
I’d love to see Colorado get away from OTC tags...as long as they don’t start selling landowner tags with resale possible.
I’m a non resident myself but that place is being raped by eastern hunters like myself. To the point that I believe calf recruitment has suffered due to heavy hunting pressure during the rut.
As another NR. I agree.
I would rather hunt there less but have a quality hunt when there. By quality I don’t mean inches of horn. But less people. So I would support a draw for all units.
Theres already states like that. Arizona and New Mexico. Takes years to get a tag. I have met numerous hunters from New Mexico that come up and buy otc in Colorado to get to hunt every year. Start applying in those states or Wyoming or Utah for a quality hunt. Enjoy Colorado every year.
There's no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. But if Colorado does away with otc then most every non-resident will automatically start applying for multiple states to up their odds of getting a tag. That will accelerate point creep like you have never seen. Then hunters in neighboring states will get less tags and start applying in Colorado adding to point creep even more. On top of that the states will think since demand is greater then we should charge more for tags. It will turn into a rich mans game real quick. Is it crowded? Yes. But most guys you see out where i hunt are middle aged. Is it because of loss of interest in younger generations or they simply can't afford it already? The crowning issue may subside on its own in time.
As a nonresident, I disagree as well. Deer tags went 100% draw many years ago. There are still units every year that go under subscribed. The best archery mule deer units in the state are 8-10 point units. In contrast, the best archery elk units in the state are already over 20 points and climbing. OTC elk tags are the difference. The sky didn't fall when Colorado went 100% deer draw....the sky is not going to fall if elk tags follow suit.
Not on the same scale. I don't apply for other states because i know my area after years of hunting it. A lot of my friends are the same way. With otc i know i can get a tag so i don't even apply for limited entry as 1st choice because i will be in upper 70s before i drew it anyway.
Elk will be different then deer, way more points in the system, much longer time to restore balance. I am 54, if it takes six years I would be 60. Lots of guys will likely just quit. I guess the elk and deer herds will be way down in 6 years too, with the wolf. It was a good run while it lasted. At least, pheasant are a lot easier to walk off with.
Won't happen overnight, but if the options were keep building points OR go elk hunting...rather than keep building points AND go elk hunting, it might happen faster than one thinks?
Thanks for that graph Steve. Thats what im afraid of too. Could very easily take twice as many points each time you draw. Draw with 2 pts then escalates to 4 pts then 8 pts. That translates to only getting to hunt elk 3 more times until im pushing up daisies.
In the meantime guess i better start applying for limited entry units and stockpile points. Add to point creep. Prolly just a matter of time before i will need them.
I'd be game for all-draw, as long as it applies to both archery and rifle seasons. But those who might feel that way are outnumbered by the majority of residents who don't want it to happen. All draw doesn't mean you can't continue hunting the same formerly-otc GMU that you always have, every year. Because going all-draw doesn't mean that any additional units would be managed for quality, or for less hunters. But the discussion is all moot, since that option is already off the table for the next 5 year BGSS.
TxHuntr, the "younger generations" aren't hunting elk as much because they aren't hunting, period. Not even around home where tags are cheap. For many reasons. The average age of hunters right now is around 50. One exception is the recent fad of elk hunting as an endurance sport for younger guys, but they'll get old too.
With the projected 25-30% decrease in hunters in the next 15 years, it will be interesting to see how the point-creep dynamic is affected. I'll be 80 by then and likely watching from the sidelines.
Dennis i haven't because im 50 and the way creep was going i would be in my 70's by the time i drew a trophy unit. I moved around first four years i hunted checking out areas. Found a decent spot in an otc unit so stuck with it. I know were im going so thought why take away from someone else's chances if im content where im at. All this talk makes me wonder if i shouldn't start accumulating points though.
I find it ironic that a Texas hunter, who travels 16 hrs one way with horses and mules in tow, and brags about how much money he spends to hunt in Colorado, but then claims he is concerned about hunting becoming a "rich man's game". Too funny.