Contributors to this thread:
Has anyone heard any talk on cuts to tag allocations?
If you're talking Wyoming here's the first round. From my understanding there will be even more cuts proposed at the April meeting.
Pretty hard to cut tag allocations in OTC isnt it?
Not sure there will be more cuts Push, they tend to stay pretty close to what is proposed.
At yesterday's Commission meeting, CPW staff is recommending, 75/25, across the board. Was stated, a good compromise and more simple to understand.
This means , even the high demand units that are now 80/20 will be reduced to 75/25%
Residents got screwed again. Especially on the high demand units and all the new units that were going to 80/20
If the CPW survey would not have have the 75:25 option, 80:20 would be the ‘good compromise’.
wytex I know that's the case most years and it very well may stay the same. Talked to a Bio the other day and she alluded to more cuts being very possible specifically for antelope.
Cnelk no OTC antelope in Wyoming only OTC is resident general deer and elk. But to answer your question no it isn't. If the Wyoming commission chose to set a cap on R general tags (like for NR) it would be pretty straightforward. Now I don't think that's necessary in a state with less then 600k residents and less then 150k of them being licensed hunter's. Although more of a issue every year thus the big 90/10 push.
Thanks, Paul. Assuming 75-25 is after the outfitter tags are pulled from the pool?
It would be great if folks emailed them final decison is in May.
Here is the deal, the basis for 75/25 is it is simple. One split.
But here is the deal to mention in your email:
1. They gave us more 80/20 tags in November. Now they are removing them? Who does that? Are these people used car dealers doing a bait and switch? Is this a professional organization or a bunch of amateur con artists? Where is the integrity on that? If you don't have integrity, who are you?
2. Today, we have units with dual split allocations. It is 65/35 in some 80/20 in others. How hard is it to change programming to be 75/25 in most, and 80/20 in other others? Wouldn't you be modifiying like 2 lines of programming code? Changing a 6 to a 7, and a 3 to 2? Well, then they will say but we have to update the rolling average of 6 point units, and deal with that. What is that, 20 or 30 freaking hunt codes? It should be a couple hours labor a year for a programmer. Losing any licenses in 80/20 units is a crock. Stand up, and send them a courteous but factual email being specific with your request.
What was more insane then allocation was the discussion about point banking. CPW tells them it won't solve point creep, and will make it worse - but they are still considering it. I think CPW stated 95% of all their hunt codes take less then 2 points to draw.
The “compromise” has nothing to do with being the most fair plan. It’s so they won’t lose as much money, plain and simple. I agree that the current 80/20 should stay that way. 75/25 for the rest seems fair.
Yea, they will lose plenty of money after the switch and in future years when they close down and limit the remaining archery units, and probably some rifle units after the wolves slaughter the elk and deer.
If they're anything like the Wisconsin DNR they will deny that wolves have any impact on game populations and they will continue to issue the same number of tags for non-existent deer and elk. Therefore their revenue won't be reduced.
Many of us have stated it over and over ------ it's not about "good conservation" ----- it's about money!!!!!!!!!
Sorry Push that came off wrong on my part, yes I am hearing of possibly more antelope cuts. Was odd to see no cuts in the area nearest our home but we have been seeing decent numbers wintering there and not many dead yet. Meeting this week with more info for our region in Wyoming.
Mike, I agree with you, but this isn't Wisconsin. I mean that politely. Like they say I'm from Wisconsin and I ought to know, when I moved here in 79 I attended most all Dow meetings I could and realized it's different out here, sometimes frustrating. Especially when you come from a state with a 3 month Bow season. Yes I missed that! But I tried and tried to get more opportunity and after some time realized as they told us be lucky with what you got. The liberal bias here is against hunting and to some extent always has been. i was lucky to get in a little spring bear baiting before they voted that out. Where it goes from here, with the wolves thrown in doesn't look good. they need to cut their budget like the rest of us not just keep raising fees.
"Pretty hard to cut tag allocations in OTC isnt it?"
Not really. Every limited entry drawing permit was OTC at one time.
Yes they were, and it sure was nice being able to jump around in different units if things were slow in your unit. The elk in different drainages / units only 30 miles apart seemed to go into the rut at different times as well as degrees.
Tell me how the CPW can implement reduced tags in a current OTC area - other than making it a LE.
I’ll wait.
Nonresident cap by gmu would be the first step to try, in a sane and rational world.
My posts are in reference to tag cuts due to the bad winter. Nothing else.
Yea ok. The op used "allocations". I tend to think quota. So aren't female tags all limited except for es archery?
Won't female tag reductions be the tool?
B List cow tags are unlimited in certain units
wytex no worries I was also surprised at the cuts. Might be a bit of wishful thinking on my part as I personally feel the cuts didn't go far enough. I do agree that the numbers will be pretty close to what's posted if not the same.
Well, steamboat area has had the highest calf recruitment in the state. last May they said, 18,000 elk were going to be a projected 24k. Maybe it is time to get rid of list B cow tags. I never could figure out why they wanted to limit an OTC archery unit, at the same time they are selling list B cow tags. The SW units come to mind.
Some list B is for harvest on PLO, like my backyard. Filled the freezer for me the last two years.
Easy to cut OTC tags. Simply cap the total that can be sold, whether resident, non-resident or both. Once the number is reached no more are sold. I’m pretty sure AZ already does this with deer tags and they sold out pretty fast last year. Not really pure OTC, but tell me one state that doesn’t offer internet purchase of “OTC” tags…..
I suggest that those interested in what CPW staff presented to the Commission at the meeting, topic being , Resident Nonresident license allocations, tune into the CPW website and watch the Commission meeting, March 15th, Day 1, on Youtube live. Of interest, this subject, from Day 1, minute 33 to minute 59. The suggested recommendations from Staff to Commission are in detail.
My take from the staff report:
1. 2022 survey indicated that residents wanted , max more licenses to residents. So at the Nov 2022 Commission meeting, the commission took action on the High Demand units, ie, 80/20 with a new 3 year average., That would add 26 deer hunt codes, 14, elk hunt codes, 30 pronghorn hunt codes and 4 bear hunt codes. That action will affect the 2023 season.
2. Based on the 2020-21 license allocations 1200 deer and elk licenses will shift from 65/35 to the 80/20 BUT only 200 licenses will actually shift from non resident to residents. So the Commission action did shift some licenses from non resident to residents.
3. Based on a 2023 survey, this indicated residents hunters wanted MORE Licenses, but according to the survey, 75/25 vs Status Quo was most popular.
4.So staff, to max resident licenses, recommends the 75/25. They stated, residents would get 10 % more licenses that require 5 or more PP, about 300 licenses shift from res to nonres. Non residents would get 5% more license that require 6 or more PP than residents= that equal 100 shift from resident to nonresidents.
Staff concluded that: "a substantial increase in the number of residents licenses, ie, 300"
75/25, across the board would eliminate the 80/20 high demand to 75/25.
Paul's note :Colorado hunters might have been under the impression that by limiting nonresidents, a huge amount to deer and elk license would shift their way, but in reality, it seems less that 400 license would actually shift.
Also, while staff recommended Status Quo, on PP banking and averaging. The Commission wants staff to reinvestigate PP banking and bring the Commission and alternative solution or something! PP averaging is off the table and will not be discussed in the future.
I still haven't seen or heard any explanation why 80/20 wasn't an option on the survey, which is what a majority of residents wanted
Probably been mentioned in here somewhere. But when does this take effect? I would like to get what I can before you guys get rid of the nonresidents
Are you seriously crying about getting 25% of our tags. You should look at some other western states allocations
Lol. Not crying about a thing. Just asked a question about when this goes into effect
When will it take affect? I could take affect in the 2024 season but surely in the 2025-2029 Big Game Season Structure. I testified at the Commission meeting not to place it in the current BGSS but wait for the 2025 BGSS.
The same for the issue of making all big game license for elk, deer, pronghorn and bear, all be limited draw for rife, and archery. As we know, deer is all draw. THe OTC issue can take the same path.
what is the allocation now? 80/20?
nope its 65/35 it's only 80/20 in high demand units and even then CPW was way behind updating those units.
^^^ “what is the allocation now? 80/20?“
No, it’s 65/35 and 80/20 in high demand units.
Thanks Paul. So do they give the residents 75% of the tags regardless of number of PP and choice. Meaning will they give all resident 1st choice apps the tags first, then go on to 2nd, 3rd and 4th choice of residents if that's what it takes to get to 75% before they will even start on NR 1st choice applications with PP?
Residents didn’t even get 65% of the tags since Landowner Tag are taken out of the Resident pool.
Landowner tags will probably stay the same (out of the Res pool) since the CPW likes the term ‘Status Quo’ so much.
Your right I forgot about the landowner screwing we get
200 tags in higher point units is quite a bit! Should make points required go down some for residents. Or at least not keep rising.
I have to say this. I have been on record that 80/20 across the board would be fair. No question residents deserve more tags. But all the years residents smiled and commented “that’s fair” every time they raised prices on NRs has come back to bite residents. Double edge sword. I have never complained about NR tag cuts. Only about rising prices. But now what’s “fair” (high NR pricing) is costing residents tags. That’s a fact.
They are throwing you a bone though. By raising NR cow tags to the same price as bull tags, more residents should be able to draw cow tags.
Landowner tags come off the top of the total quota before the 65/35 or 80/20 split. They don’t come solely from the resident pool.
so this means my 19 pts won't be enough to draw 76 any longer?
So it seems to me that the price is going have to go up to make up for the lost revenue?
So it seems to me that cpw needs to tighten their belts and get used to less revenue like many other states. They have gotten bloated over the last several years off of license sales, and grew the agency to an unsustainable size without high revenue.
Jethro, correct, but the vast majority of outfitter..oops... "landowner" vouchers are sold to nonresidents. CPW knows this, has the data, and loves it because of the added NR revenue. So effectively, residents are eligible for less than 60% in many units. Roughly 58% are awarded to residents in my plains deer unit. No other state in the U.S. does this to resident hunters.
CONFUSED YET? In November 2022, the Parks and Wildlife Commission approved an update to big game license allocation. The three-year preference point average used to determine high-demand hunt codes that are allocated 80% to residents and 20% to nonresidents was updated such that Colorado Parks and Wildlife will use the most recent three years (with a one-year lag). This will go into effect for this 2023 season.
But now, CPW staff is recommending 75/25 R/NR across the board, and this will include the high demand units that the Commission just approved for 80/20 R/NR. at their November meeting. So, if approved, this NEW 75/25 will supersede the 80/20 high demand draw and could go into effect 2024 but surely in 2025. The CBA is recommending status quo, 80/20, on the high demand units and then 75/25 for normal draw.
^^^Absolute $h!t Show. Fairly standard for Colorado tho.
Jaq. I never looked at it before. But you got me curious about Ks tags. Roughly 182,000 deer tags sold. 133,000 to residents and 49,000 to non residents. That's all tags. Buck, doe, whitetail and mule deer. Around 73% to residents and 27% to nonresident. I will say that most of our resident tags are OTC and I believe most NR are draw only (except whitetail antlerless I think).
I am going to pick the unit I live in. (It appears to be the worst unit for residents) 1233 nonresident harvested an antlered buck. 880 residents harvested a antlered buck. Residents did harvest 4x the amount of does that nonresidents did though. Just by looking at that, I am guessing that the nonresident to residents hunting bucks in the unit I live is around 42% residents to 58% nonresidents. Residents have an easier time finding places to shoot antlerless since we can usually find a place that is leased to shoot does on after buck season.
I think in Ks we have to same kind of problem you guys do. Just a little different. Most of us residents can go buy a tag. Just no place to hunt unless you are willing to pay a large amount of $ for a lease. You guys have a harder time to draw the tag but boatloads of places to hunt (in most units). I know there is a lot of private east of I-25. But you guys can buy the landowner vouchers and hunt every year. But takes a lot of $, just like in Ks. Can get a tag every year and pay a lot of $ for a lease.
I think that it's fair on the 75-25 that Co is looking to do. But I think that after it has become the new norm and tags keep getting harder to get. The residents of Co will keep pushing to get a higher percentage. Not that I blame them. But it seems that most Co residents would just rather do away with NR.
I used to gripe about all the NR hunters in Ks running us residents out of places to hunt. But I understand why they are here and why the farmers and ranchers lease them the ground. So I decided to quit being mad the situation and hunt what and when I can. And bought a boat so I can spend all the time I can/want and go fishing. It doesn't seem to have the nonresident vs resident hate that hunting does.
I will admit that I wish Ks would ban baiting. I think it would open up more ground for residents at a cheaper price. But it might not either. Doubt it happens though. Ks is no different than Co in the fact the state loves their $
Ksrancher, in the area where I hunt on the eastern plains, outfitter vouchers are selling for $4000-6000. Kind of pricey for residents. There is no huntable public land in the units. The ranch where I cowboyed for 20 years and had permission to hunt was eligible for 19 tags for deer and for pronghorns, but there is so much demand for those tags that in some seasons it is easier to draw as a resident than an outfitter/ landowner. Some of the landowner tags require one or two more points to draw than in the general draw, but for that kind of $$$ value, it's understandable.
I'm very fortunate to have found a decent new spot to hunt, but deer numbers are down all over the units, the size of bucks is way down, and continuing to slide since NRs paying $8000-12,000 for a hunt just want to shoot a buck of any kind. And there is a two week December rifle season where bucks are still with the does and feeding out in the open. Our area WCO wants the CPW to cut back on those December rifle tags, but so far no luck.
Just a few years ago an honest 160 muley was ho-hum. Now it is a buck to pursue for almost everyone. I haven't drawn my bow in two seasons, hoping some of them will survive to reach that next size. The ranch where I hunt now has no outfitting, only family and friends. The owner hasn't let any of the rifle hunters shoot a muley for two years, for the same reason.
I feel your pain. To lease a piece of ground in the unit I live in (unit 16) will cost that $5000-$6000 for one guy. And exactly like yours, the amount of public land is akmost zero.
As a Kansas resident, I could hunt white tail deer every year in my unit. Just as long as I threw enough money at it. Just the same as Colorado residents could pretty well hunt any unit every year, just as long as they threw enough money at it. Kansas residents would just pay it in lease money and Colorado residents would pay it in the form of a voucher
So do they give the residents 75% of the tags regardless of number of PP and choice. Meaning will they give all resident 1st choice apps the tags first, then go on to 2nd, 3rd and 4th choice of residents if that's what it takes to get to 75% before they will even start on NR 1st choice applications with PP?
Yes, Residents have to "stand in line" and those with the highest numbers of PPs, draw until the number of draw license allocated are use up by those with the highest amount of PPs. If 100 licenses are available, 75 go to the highest PP holders in the Resident pool and 25 go to the highest PP holders in the non resident pool, Because of the "Soft draw" ,ie, lack of participation from the resident or non resident pool, residents or non residents could draw more than the 75/25.
Ok. Thanks. The reason I was asking was because a unit I was looking at would be all the way down into 3rd choice for residents to get to 75% before a NR would get a tag that was their first choice. I thought it might go off of first choice for a resident and even if the 75% wasn't met it would go over to NR first choice. And if all tags weren't gone after that, it would then go on to 2nd choice residents
