More elk units going limited
Colorado
Page 21, units elk units 80 & 81 proposed to go limited JUST FOR ARCHERY OF COURSE.
I haven't fully digested the issue paper yet, but a couple things jump out at me. They used a Facebook poll to gather input to limit archery hunters? Seriously? Wonder if fact checkers checked that data. If you read the Monte Vista data from 19 rifle hunters, and 5 archers, 20 of 21 of them said archery is crowded? Who fact checked that? That doesn't make any sense. Why is there never an option in these issue papers for residents to retain OTC licensing, and NR residents to be limited. We know currently nonresidents exceed resident hunters in OTC elk units, yet this issue paper makes no mention of participation based on residency? Seriously? Last session, Senators Garcia and Woodward actually ran a bill to limit nonresident hunters. The bill was withdrawn once CPW agreed to deal with this issue....but apparently that has been forgotten. In the recent past, Archers have lost OTC licensing in E-16 in Eagle and Pitkin counties, then they limited basically the whole SW part of the state to archery elk hunters. It doesn't take a rocket scientists to know why folks say crowding is an issue, because a 53,000 archers keep getting jammed into a smaller geographic area. While this area is reportedly suffering from low calf recruitment, and archers are being proposed to be limited, Unit 80 and 81 both offer a PLO cow tag as a "B tag" with a season from Sept 1 to Jan 31 which means one hunter can kill two elk. Seriously? 2nd and 3rd rifle season are currently unlimited licensing, and no changes are being proposed. What a disappointment! Get ready for more crowding coming to your OTC area as hunters get forcefully relocated out of 80 and 81.
Just saw this -
I also made a thread over on the Main Forum
The SW units of CO were limited or abolished because of the massive fires that scorched the environs 3-4 years ago.
^^^ Wow. More fantasy from Arizona. Legalizing pot in that state was not a good thing, apparently...
A forest fire's effects on elk can be mitigated by limiting archery hunters while having unlimited rifle hunters. It's not rocket science and makes perfect sense.
Also a great way to increase calf recruitment in the SW was limiting bowhunters, who took an insignificant number of cows and left the woods 7 months before calving season. Pregnancy rates were not an issue so rut interruption wasn't the reasoning but calves weren't making it from their April- May birth into July. Obviously a bowhunter issue...
Yeah you guys might want to go back and check the data for the fires in 2018 and where.
Gosh, no, we don't know anything about those fires or their documented effect on the bowhunting harvest statistics vs. rifle harvest vs. calf recruitment. We just woke up from a long nap. Care to enlighten us with some hard data?
BTW, 70% of my unit burned last year and in 2014 and the majority of NF access roads are still closed. Yet they still gave out the same number of archery and rifle tags. Hmmmmm.....
CPW will never give up the $. I wish they’d make all units draw only and 90% residents, 10% non resident.
WY seems to do all right.
BTW, 70% of my unit burned last year and in 2014 and the majority of NF access roads are still closed. Yet they still gave out the same number of archery and rifle tags. Hmmmmm....
As usual Jaquie your reasoning is flawed. The CPW issued those tags prior to the fires occurrence. Yes you had a ticket but due to an “act of God” you couldn’t use it because of safety and access closures. You’ll see restrictions and less tags/oppty for several years going forward. Nature rules.
Az, one again you are dead wrong. How can one person go through life being wrong so much of the time?
The Cameron Peak fire happened in 2020. The tag allocations were set in May of 2021. Dude, get off the newly legal weed down there.
Oh please. The cameron peak fire did not burn over 70% of unit 8. As far as tag allotments go they were set way prior to May of '21. April 6th was the application deadline and May is when the draw happens. You're on your own timeline I reckon.
Talking about unit 19,, where I hunt. But a huge amount of 8 was inaccessible because every road north of Deadman was closed, even where the fire was nowhere close. So everyone was crammed into a small area. I was there. Were you? Tag allotments are set at the May Commission meeting after the winter counts are completed. That's fact. The elk draws don't happen until May 24-28. Wow.
Nope wasn't there in 19. Hunted 161 & 15. Not crowded at all. You chose wrongly I guess. I can only conclude the fires didn't impact the elk in a very significant manner. So do you just park yourself on the RMNP boundary?
You seem to conclude a lot of stupid shit with no basis in fact, then move on to more stupid shit when called on it. Have a nice fantasy life. I have better things to do than continue to correct your "conclusions". See ya.
161 and 15 ain’t crowded?
WTF? They are so popular it’s crazy.
From: cnelk12-Nov-21Private Reply 161 and 15 ain’t crowded? WTF? They are so popular it’s crazy.
Well not from my experience. Lots of hunters hanging out close to roads but I expect that. Hike just a mile into the Sarvis or Zirkle wilderness cross country and I never see another hunter all day back in there.
First, been in zirkles and won’t go back unless there are no other options. Yes it is crowded!!! Maybe you found a spot people aren’t getting too, but you just advertised to a lot of people that info….good luck in years to come! I too didn’t see many where I hiked into, but elk felt the pressure from the masses all around! And you can keep your Arizona style management, I like elk hunting every year! I don’t want to wait years to hunt just for the chance at a 350-400 bull, I like to hunt!!
First, been in zirkles and won’t go back unless there are no other options. Yes it is crowded!!! Maybe you found a spot people aren’t getting too, but you just advertised to a lot of people that info….good luck in years to come! I too didn’t see many where I hiked into, but elk felt the pressure from the masses all around! And you can keep your Arizona style management, I like elk hunting every year! I don’t want to wait years to hunt just for the chance at a 350-400 bull, I like to hunt!!
Oh it’s the same in every wilderness I’ve ever hunted. Get .5 mile off the road and trail and no one else is around. If I do run into another hunter we’ll talk and exchange info because why not. Your going that way, I just came from there, yada yada. Once in awhile we’ll if it’s agreeable hunt an area together then part ways. People aren’t going to rush into the Zirk because I said something about it and why would I care if they did? So much country to hunt there. It’s not like I’ll newberg stain the place. Funny story. I was cutting firewood for the camp at 10k feet. A pickup stopped to talk with 4 guys from Pennsylvania. Not one of them was under 300lbs. They camped about .25 mile away and we never saw them afield. They left after 3 days. Couldn’t hack the altitude and the work inherently involved. First time elk hunters in the west and clueless. Kinda sad really. I hunt elk every year too somewhere. Or I’ll just go along and be the CB and help out. Can’t beat sept and oct out in the high hills.
I like to hunt elk every year in my home state! It’s nice you can afford to chase elk wherever you please, the majority of hunters can’t spend that kind of money. Again I want nothing to do with Arizona type management that cuts opportunities!
I've believed for years that CPW should make the entire state draw for elk. It would allow CPW to manage the herd more effectively. I have not hunted archery otc since 2011. I apply in a draw unit that requires 0-1 points and have drawn that tag every year I have applied. And, I would rather miss a year once in a while than have to fight with all the growing OTC crowd. Quality over quantity...any day!
If they reduced nonresident some and increased resident opportunities on those draws so residents could still have opportunities every year I’d be fine with that. We know they won’t give up the cash cow though, they’ve gotten so bloated as an agency they have to have that revenue now!
I wouldn't worry too much about hunter numbers increasing. It's looking like the x-vaxs are kicking in to high gear now. More than half the population is going to have bigger things to worry about then the next hunt. Plus the brandon run away inflation economy will also squash a lot of future plans.
Here is the likely problem with the "I'm fine if it ALL goes limited, I go in a unit that take 0-1 points" This is based on data from 2018. All those OTC hunters, are likely carrying a boatload of points. consider 160,000 to 250,000 points now being used for limited licenses.
A 0-1 point unit. might become a 4 point unit real fast. Everyone good with hunting every 5th year?
But over time, the 4 point unit will go back to being a 0-1 point unit.
well (with large margin of error, lets say 200,000 points, when it is all limited maybe 35,000 licenses of which 65% roughly go to residents would be about 22,750 resident licenses. Simple math would be 8.79 years. Nothing about the conversion math would be simple though. Maybe it is 5, maybe it is 10.
I'm like you, I hunt limited, gave up OTC, takes 3 to 4 points now. No way do I want points to flood the market. I'm 57, I'd switch to pheasant, they are alot easier to carry out.
well (with large margin of error, lets say 200,000 points, when it is all limited maybe 35,000 licenses of which 65% roughly go to residents would be about 22,750 resident licenses. Simple math would be 8.79 years. Nothing about the conversion math would be simple though. Maybe it is 5, maybe it is 10.
I'm like you, I hunt limited, gave up OTC, takes 3 to 4 points now. No way do I want points to flood the market. I'm 57, I'd switch to pheasant, they are alot easier to carry out.
Grasshopper, I suspect the point issue that you described is why they aren't converting all archery units to draw in one year. It's pretty obvious that total elimination of archery OTC is the end game but they are rolling it in a few units at a time.
And it is inevitable that all will become draw units in the next decade because it is like a snowball rolling. Each time they eliminate a few units from OTC puts the remaining OTC units under heavier hunting pressure. Which leads to pressure to switch additional OTC units to draw. There's really no way to stop the snowball at this point.
From azelkhunter. “ From: cnelk12-Nov-21Private Reply 161 and 15 ain’t crowded? WTF? They are so popular it’s crazy. Well not from my experience. Lots of hunters hanging out close to roads but I expect that. Hike just a mile into the Sarvis or Zirkle wilderness cross country and I never see another hunter all day back in there”.
Unit 15 is not in the Zirkle Wilderness
I'm with you, Steve. Pheasants are much easier to get out of the woods. I agree that there are many issues with going draw. People will get screwed no matter what.
If you believe the Zirkel wasn't crowded, you were either not actually there, or you worked really hard to find a spot where others weren't accessing. I hunt 16 and 161 every year, and while I've shot a couple elk up there, you have to WORK to get away from people, much harder than just a handful of years ago. For example, one of the trailheads I used to access 6 or 7 years ago, would have maybe 10 trucks on opening weekend. That same trailhead had almost 40 trucks parked there this past opening weekend.... What gets me, I could not imagine driving 1 or 2 thousand miles across the country, pull into a trailhead and see 30 or 40 other vehicles, and think "Alright man, this is going to be awesome!" My first response would be "NOPE, now to plan B! (then C, then D, then F, etc. etc)
During archery there was very little pressure. We didn’t get up there till the 17th tho so I was thinking most had left. I rarely elk hunt out of trailheads. I have a different methodology from most. That’s probably why I rarely see others.
Cheaper just to buy a side of beef.
The more I watch the CPW meetings, the more I realize how terrible the commissioners are. I lost track of how many times the term "archery hunters numbers are exploding" or "archery hunting has grown exponentially" was stated by the commissioners. Neither are true. Yes there are more archery hunters, but in terms of relative growth, and hunter numbers relative to the duration of the season, I don't see either an "explosion" or "exponential growth." CBA need to go full bore to stop this fallacy.
Bowhunters are under full blown attack by the CPW and it appears the CBA is just taking it. Statements by the CBA that they would "entertain" split muzzleloader and archery seasons, and "entertain" camo orange (when it camo orange wasn't even in the issue for discussion) is wrong. Why doesn't the CBA take a more aggressive response to statements like this? Where is the CBA in arguing to aggressively limiting non-resident OTC archery licenses? -Frustrated in Colorado
There was an open position for CBA CPW liaison for over a year after grasshopper resigned, and nobody was willing to step up to assume the role. Hmmm...wonder why?
I think Paul has a chart showing the more than doubling of archery elk hunters, and a relative "explosion" in NR participation. CPW loves that NR revenue. When we suggest limiting NRs in Sportsman's Roundtable meetings, they throw it back to us with the caveat that any changes must be revenue neutral. So if they stick with that philosophy there is no way to further limit NRs without a major license fee increase for both residents and NRs.
I would gladly pay double the resident license fee if we could severely limit NRs, but some CO hunters act like an extra $50 would be the difference between their family eating or starving to death.
I'm ok paying more but history tells me the biggest impact of higher resident fees would be....higher resident fees. CPW doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. Show me real improvement and I'll be on board. CPW's credit terms with me are C.O.D.
From: Jaquomo but some CO hunters act like an extra $50 would be the difference between their family eating or starving to death.
I'm betting there's more truth in that then you realize. Keep resident fees as low as possible. Lots of good folks depend on the fishing and hunting for their larder.
Don, my point was to absorb a higher resident fee if they would severely limit NRs. Like the other western states do. Otherwise we get screwed all around. I agree with you on that. I would gladly trade an extra $50 for a hard cap of 20% for all NRs, including OTC. Which is our wer dream here in CO.
From: Jaquomo20-Nov-21Private Reply Don, my point was to absorb a higher resident fee if they would severely limit NRs. Like the other western states do. Otherwise we get screwed all around. I agree with you on that. I would gladly trade an extra $50 for a hard cap of 20% for all NRs, including OTC. Which is our wer dream here in CO. Personally I'd like to see our respective States extract the bulk of their revenue from the industries that most impact our lands and wildlife. Mining, corporate farms and fossil fuels need to pay up. But I forget; corps and such don't pay taxes.
I don't disagree Lou. But its sort of like a hostage ransom. Not interested in handing over the briefcase until I know they wouldn't or couldn't crawfish on the deal. We are pretty far down a path of huge budgets and sort of trapped in the current paradigm. God forbid if elk crash like mule deer did. There isn't another contender to take over as the golden goose. Everyone on every side of the issue would be in for some massive changes.
They could double the nonresident permit cost and still easily sell 50% of the current number of NR permits. Revenue neutral, no added cost for residents, easier draws for residents. The only people that would whine are NRs (like me), outfitters, and businesses that rely on NRs.
It's also fair for you residents to question why CP&W is unwilling to cut their expenses. They seem to have a very large revenue stream. How does it compare to other states?
Personally, I will never support another cpw fee increase again. Nothing but broken promises.
I was told in response to a direct question from the director, there would be no preference point fees, the application fee would in essence be the fee for a point. Shortly there after they adopted point fees.
Additionally, with cpi increases we just had a 1.9 percent increase this month for next year. The next cpi adjustment might be double digits.
In watching the performance of this commission, I am of the opinion we need legislative change to solve issues. The few hunters we have on the commission are not hunter friendly.
