Limiting CO elk units. Time for action

txhunter58

Long Time Member
Messages
8,501
The Colorado DOW has opened the nomination process for furthur limiting of elk hunting in Colorado. Nominations are due by mid June. Here is the link to the process: http://wildlife.state.co.us/hunt/limitedDAUprocess/index.asp

I am going to put in my 2 cents, but sounds like they really want imput from residents. Time to put your money/effort where your mouth is if you want to get it done.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
Providing input to the DOW is a waste of time. All you have to do is look at the official DOW recommendations for the 5 year BGSS to see that they don't care about public input.
Especially from CO residents.
They new draw area's for Elk will probable be GMU's 92, 93,98,102,103,117,122,127,132,139,145

Course.....thats just my Opinion ;-)
 
yeah there's a ton of elk in those units!
If enough people rise up and voice their opinion it will be heard.
Jeff
 
Ilive in Montrose and we went through the
process 2 years ago. DOW strongly recommended
unit 62 go draw as is 61. The money interests
veteoed it at a meeting in Grand Junction.
A lesson learned to me was that money interests
win out over sportsman interests. They are far
more VOCAL and organized than the hunters. I
will be attending the Gunnison comm meeting July 1
to support more draw units but you can bet some
business interests will be very VOCAL in their
opposition to more draw units.
 
Not all sportsmen are for making more units limited entry. Colorado has more Elk than it needs now. It does not make sense to limit licenses when you need to thin down the herd. Arizona is limited entry becuase of the size of the herd (that makes sense). If you want the opportunity to hunt a trophy area then go apply in states with limited draws like the rest of us do.

All I hear from the most of the Colorado residents is it's all about money. You guys hunt for $30 dollars a year and don't contribute to the economy with your Hotel, gas and grocery dollars. The land is owned by the US gov't (I know the animals belong to the State) and I have to pay a premium to hunt on it. I read on here all the time how you guys make fun of whitetail hunters because they hunt on Private Ranchs and hunt over food plots from blinds (don't agree with high fences). The land owners themselves had to pay to fix their properties to make them more animal friendly. They did not ask the government to do it for them. It seems that the locals want the Taxpayers to pay for making the hunting in their State better. How it that fair? The State agencies are there to manage the Land for ALL concerned. The private citizens who own a grocery store have just as much right to voice their opinion as sportsmen do because they pay taxes to support the same land we hunt on.

If you want to have Trophy hunting all the time then go buy some land and manage it to your liking.

I love to hunt. The hunting season it all to short. I eat sleep and breath hunting 365-24/7. We have to see the big picture or the anti's are going to tell us what the big picture is and that is totally unacceptable.

Now that I have pissed off 90% of the people on this board, I will get off my soap box.

I hope everybody draws their unit and has a great hunting season. Darran
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-01-04 AT 12:03PM (MST)[p]BChunter said: "Not all sportsmen are for making more units limited entry. Colorado has more Elk than it needs now. It does not make sense to limit licenses when you need to thin down the herd."

To expand on the answer COhunter gave, I would agree and I think 99% of hunters would agree that we don't have too many bulls in OTC units. We have too many cows. So lowering the bull harvest a bit in more units and still allowing a robust cow harvest seems fair to me as a nonresident. I would personally be happy hunting for a bull every other year if I have less crowding and some increase in quality. If you haven't been cow hunting, you are missing the boat. Some of my cow hunts have been as memorable as the bull hunts. You have a great experience in a beautiful state and learn more about elk hunting every time you go, plus have a better chance of bringing home the bacon, not to mention that you spend $250 less for the tag.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
>All I hear from the most
>of the Colorado residents is
>it's all about money.
>You guys hunt for $30
>dollars a year and don't
>contribute to the economy with
>your Hotel, gas and grocery
>dollars.

Yeah, you betcha. We all drive out of state to buy our groceries, gas, and to take our wives out to dinner. <rolleyes>
 
Just like Bluehair, I drive to New Mexico or Kansas when I need gas and food

I also don't pay my property tax, state income tax and sales tax year round. Dang I got it good here by only paying $30

You'll never catch me helping the state economy ;-)
 
I am a Colo resident and anytime a nonres has any
complaints about the hunting opp please tell me
where a nonres has it better than Colo. Unlimited
bull tags to 83% of the state, 40%of all draw tags
for bulls and cows and $250 for a cow tag. Now
in what other state do you have those opp. The
answer is nowhere for all 3 of those.PLEASE
prove me wrong on any of those 3 items. Please.
 
Rocketman, where in my post said I wanted to change anything. you guys want to change things not me. Your herd is well above objectives in just about ever unit. You should have unlimited elk tags over the counter. The only thing I don't understand is why the DOW will not let me buy an additional cow tag.

I buy food and gas here in Texas because I live. The local Hotel is not going to make a dime on me during deer season. For that matter, since I live close, I typically take my own food so I can stay out all day and not have to go in town. By hunting locally, I don't add any additional cash to the economy. Simple economics says that it is outside dollars that make an economy grow. I guess if you add all the money I spend everyday doing my normal stuff plus what I spend out of State then I will spend a bunch hunting. I guess I can sleep better knowing that I spend alot of money hunting on land that I pay to keep up thru my tax dollars. I'm glad you get to hunt so cheap. I guess it is bothersome that you say it is all about money and don't pay anymore than that. I would be able to see it better if we were all on a level playing field in terms of cost. Oh well, I just pissed off the remaining 10%

I have a right to my opinion. Sorry to have ruffled your feather. Have a great day. Darran
 
BLUEHAIR,
I beleave what was ment is that your actions during the hunting season (strickly involving hunting) doesn't hold a candle to what the nonres. does for your ecommumy during those times of the year.
I can't deni your bit about the rest of the year.
we all pay our dues for pleasures we encounter during the non hunting season.
if you could aford to hunt out of state you would probably see the light.
the cash flow in the fall/hunting months means a great deal to many of the communities that don't have much to offer as far as turerisium.
my groceriy bill for the 10 days i'm in colorado usaly runs around $300 bucks, out for supper before the hunt and after$200, hay, and misc. at one of your local tack shops $100, gas while i'm in yur state $350, a stop at your local camping stores for camping upgrades $200,
then theres the lic. 490 bucks.
got to remember I'm a cheep ass do it yourself hunter.
you said you pay 30 for lic. and some change for gas,
ofcorse you got every thing else you need,
no wonder the locals hate to see the locals hunt,
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-02-04 AT 10:54AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jun-02-04 AT 10:51?AM (MST)

Puuuullleeezzzz. What a bunch of bullchit. I apologize in advance for what I am about to say. }>

All I ever hear is a bunch of out-of-staters whining about how much it costs them to hunt in Colorado. That's bad enough, but when you imply that the residents don't contribute to the local economies, it's borderline ignernt. Trust me, I aint a leech living off of the crumbs you kindly leave here on your way back to paradise.

I pay more in state income taxes than you babies pay for your whole damn hunting trip. Schitt, my bar tab is more than you spend on food. I won't bother to go into all of the other support the residents provide through the year, but foregoing a hunting trip or two in favor of a few economics classes might be a consideration for some of you.

Now don't get me wrong. I like the hell out of the friendly folks from Texa$$ who come to visit once or twice a year, but y'all need to get over yerselfs. Colarada is still gunna be here after you have decided you have had enough of us arrogant bastids. Oh sure, the out of staters share of that lost $1.5 billion in recreational revenues is going to hurt for a while, and I might loose my October part time job washin winders down at the station, but I'll probably figger a way to get by. Hell, I might even have to move to Texa$$. :)

Look, I wouldn't mind a bit if the tag prices for residents were raised a bit. Especilly if the number of non-resident tags were reduced in favor of liberalized bag limits for residents. See, then we would both get what we want.;-)

You guys have to understand that it's hard to take you serious when the typical out of state hunting camp is a half dozen $40k pickups pulling camp trailers and 15 quads.

Thanks for the good wishes on the out of state experience. Someday I hope to avail myself of the opportunity. <rolleyesagain>
 
I have always stated that I am ok with resonable limits on nonresidents if they don't continue to price us out of the market. Heck, make all nonresidents draw all licenses. I would be ok with hunting a bull every other year. Just don't make it a sport only for the rich. But you know that isn't going to happen. Since it is a foregone conlusion that the DOW will continue to raise our prices EVERY year, I think it is reasonable to not want to be severely restricted in numbers.

I can afford to go if I choose to at twice the price, but every year, I hear of another friend that can't afford it.

I do appreciate greatly the lowering of cows to $250 and the fact that they didn't raise prices that much this year. I also know how great the privaledge to hunt in CO is.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
I'm not complaining about what it cost me. I just made the point that the locals complain about it being a money issue and they pay 30 bucks.

I will pay the non-reisdent fee to hunt in CO and am glad to have the opportunity.

You made the point that you would be glad to raise resident rates and make less licenses avaiable for us. You did not add the the money flow. You kept it the same or made it less. No progress.

You say that all the camps from out of state has the fancy rigs (for the record, our rig has 180,000 miles on it and is 8 years old). For the price it cost, the average joe blow has a hard time affording out of state tags. Like tx58 said, I here of less people making the trip because of money contraints. By your comments that is a good thing in your eyes. The money has to come from somewhere. If the government has to start subsidizing (sp) hunting then we will see the end of it as we know it. That's just a fact.

You act like us Texa$$ hunters have less of a right to hunt on land that our tax dollars (read every tax paying American) pays to help manage. I just see that as near sighted. If they kept us out and made resident licenses $600 to make up for the revenue loss, how many local hunters would have to stay home?

I just think we need to get the local economies on our side and make sure we make them feel like we care about them and we would have an easier time with the DOW. Just a few thoughts from an evidently stupid non-resident.

Hope everyone has a great hunting season. Darran
 
the dow is going to do as they see fit,
there isn't a vote going to happen from the requests of a few people,,,
its up to the individual who is trying to pass this idea to develope the intrest in the other board members.
its a political move on someones part to restrict hunting pressure, and in the long run to shut it down totaly,
thats allright,
hell i only have a few good years left to hunt anyway.
so what if my kids and grand kids never get to hunt, they will at least see some great pictures taken of herds of creatures that once existed prior the great pluge that wiped them out.
kind of like cwd will do here shortly.
 
Lets go back and review, shall we?

First of all, I'm not the one moaning about what it costs to hunt in Colorado. By your own figures, the tag is nowhere near the largest component of what y'all spend on your trips.

Secondly, if you're going to quote me get it right. I NEVER said ALL out of staters were equipped with the all the latest and greatest toys. I said that this was typical. Although I may still be painting with too broad a brush, I would have hoped that you understood the point I'm trying to make.

That point is this: if you want to draw this resident into an argument, drive on up here in your $75,000 rig, pile out at the local convenience store, and commence to bitchin' about how much your tag cost. Then make sure that you look down your noses at the locals, and tell them how they owe you a cheap hunting experience since you are the one we owe our existence to.

The point about hunting becoming prohibitively expensive is a sad one. I agree that this sport is going the way of only those who can afford it. So you want to address the issue by raising the prices for the poor residents who are forced to get by for a whole year on the profits they make on your gas and ice purchases?

Get real guys......your bitching about tag prices is selfish and greedy.:)
 
Where did I ##### about the price of tags. I bitched about someone paying $30 and saying it always a money issue. You are one going off on how we have fancy rigs and such. If you read that in my post then my bad.

We're not selfish and greedy. Your cheap. :p If they raised your tags to $100 (just a number for reference) then that would ADD to the cashflow. That would give the DOW more money not less or stay the same. I don't mind the non-res tag prices at all. I really wish they would let me purchase an additional cow tag for the same unit but they will not. :-(

Have a great day. Darran
 
After reading several comments about the res nonres issue.
Here are some facts. The discrepency between the cost
of tags in Colo is no different than all the other
western states.Example New Mex res elk 60 nonres 490 and
790. Utah res 60 and 180 nonres just raised to 790.
Wyoming res 46 and nondes492 and 892 next year
in the increased odds .Those are the 3 bordering
states to Colo. So we are doing what ALL the other
states are doing. So wheres the beef(elk)? Colo tried
to raise the res fee this year and the states republican
committee veteoed it even though almost all sportsman
supported it.We sportsman are trying again this -next year
to raise the res fee.
790
 
I've never been part of a group that had anyone "look down their noses" at a Colorado resident hunter. I've also never been given a hard time by a resident hunter. When I've been out, everyone I've run into has been "fellow hunters" and we've had a great time talking with each other.

The fact of the matter is mankind's favorite sport is griping and it is getting ridiculous on this subject.

Our complaint as nonresidents is that is not fair to be penalized multiple ways by states to hunt on federally-owned land. If we have to pay 20X higher prices than residents, we ought to have equal access to tags. If you are going to limit us to a fraction of the tags, we ought to pay the same price. Not just in Colorado, but all western states.

The state game agencies are not the ones paying for the bulk of habitat management activities, the federal resource management agencies are. So quit trying to reason that if your state wildlife agencies don't have all of this money that the wildlife populations will plummet.

I realize that hunter overcrowding is a big problem and that is ridiculous that few bucks/bulls survive past 2-3 years old. I think most if all of the state should be draw only.

But quit hammering the nonresidents alone. We have just as much right to hunt federal lands as residents do. State wildlife agencies shouldn't have an unregulated right to restrict us as much as they do without having to cosider us as part of their contigency.
 
>I've never been part of a
>group that had anyone "look
>down their noses" at a
>Colorado resident hunter. I've
>also never been given a
>hard time by a resident
>hunter. When I've been
>out, everyone I've run into
>has been "fellow hunters" and
>we've had a great time
>talking with each other.

Your experience mirrors most of mine. I have no problem with non-resident hunters, and understand completely the contribution they make to our rural economies. I took offense to the implication that residents are the parasites in this system.

>But quit hammering the nonresidents alone.
> We have just as
>much right to hunt federal
>lands as residents do.
>State wildlife agencies shouldn't have
>an unregulated right to restrict
>us as much as they
>do without having to cosider
>us as part of their
>contigency.

The reality is that as of now neither you nor I have any such "right". You have the opportunity to apply to hunt subject to the the State's regulations, and a "right" to access Federal lands. As was pointed out above, Colorado is very liberal when it comes to non-resident hunting opportunities, and one of the ways to keep it that way is to manipulate demand through pricing structure.

I wasn't baggin' on all non-residents, just a few with the "you owe us" attitude. Residents don't owe NR's a cheap tag, and NR's don't owe us our livelihood.

When y'all come on up here this fall, remember not to tie your deer head on the handlebars of your 4-wheeler for the trip back home. It looks tacky.;-)
 
A lot of the complaining you hear from nonresidents from non-Western states is based on the fact that we can't hunt nearly as cheaply in our home states as you can in yours. Particularly in Texas, there very little public land. We have to pay pretty expensive lease fees that probably average $1,000 per person on the very low side. I'm not talking about true trophy hunting either. Our actual license costs are about the same as your for residents. By the time it is said and done, we pay nearly $100 for combo fishing/hunting licenses + all the various stamps we have to have. Nonresidents pay about $250 for a full license which they can kill up to five deer with (depending on where you hunt) plus small game.

This is the same for other states I'm familiar with including Oklahoma and Louisiana.

We don't have the opportunity to hunt anywhere for less than $100 like most of the residents of western states. Yet, we pay the same taxes as you do for management of the public lands. We just want a fair chance for equal access. I'm not saying residents of those states should pay a lot more. I wish we paid less. I can afford it, but not many can. It is getting very difficult for lower middle class kids to have anywhere to hunt outside of the western US.

If we can't go afford to go west as nonresidents at least every few years for a reasonable price, hunting interest will go down over the long term, regardless of what short term demand says right now.

And there aren't enough people in the west to out-vote folks elsewhere in the country when hunting rights are truly challenged someday.

I would love to kill a true trophy, but all I really care about is the chance to keep hunting and to teach my young boys that same love. There is nothing in my opinion that compares with hunting the mountains and Great Plains.

Oh and by the way, if the western Game and Fish departments didn't make the hunting regulations and license applications so darned complicated it might not cost them so much money to administer those programs. The multiple short seasons and hundreds of small management units are ridiculous. Animals would get less pressure if they made the seasons longer and spread people out.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-03-04 AT 12:08PM (MST)[p]I think it is ok to have this conversation (which is a rehash of many, many similar conversations). However, could we start another thread for that? Does anyone have any other thoughts to add about the original post?

One of the things that I worry about with a small amout of addtional limited units, is that it will mean guys will move over to unlimited units increasing the crowding there and the small increase limited units will have a lot of people trying for them, which will mean fairly high preference points to draw a slightly increased quality unit. In a lot of ways, I think it would be better to make all the units limited for bulls, then there is no increased hunters on any units, and people can't hoard points if they want to hunt.

However, I have mixed feeling to going to totally limited units because that definately means a reduction in tags for nonresidents.

I guess we will see if my fears about only some becoming limited come to pass. I hope not.

As far as changing unit 62, I think they could get the locals on board if they only made 62 a moderately restricted unit. In other words, just reduce the number of bull tags by 30-40%. Still gives the locals lots of hunters, but makes the unit a better quality unit, at least as far as crowding and hunter success. You would probably have to restrict the numbers much more if you want substantial icrease in quality.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
The DOW has made it just about impossible to get any new GMU's added with the requirements they demand. Whats sad is the Utah boy's post (Utah Elk quality vs. quantity) talking about how they want to keep the high quality system that they currently have as long as Colorado remains the joke state as far as quality and tag numbers go.

Like I stated earlier, if CO adds any new restricted Bull units, it will be in the following GMU's:

GMU 92,93,98,102,103,117,122,127,132,139,145
 
Bet you they include some others. Maybe not 62, but I would bet that 54 goes limited. At least, I hope you are wrong.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-05-04 AT 05:43PM (MST)[p]I sent in my recommendations for DAUs to go limited for bulls:

E-20 (units 61-62) Reduce unit 62 by 25-50% Should keep the locals happy

Unit E-30: primarily unit 74. 50% reduction in bull tags

E-41: unit 54. 50-75% reduction

E-15: mainly unit 43. 50% reduction

Obviously, I can't "notify" all the local interested parties as they want nominating parties to do, but if enough of us send in recommendations, someone will listen. Doesn't mean they will act on it, but it beats sitting at home watching Mash re-runs

COhunter: I finally got your joke about the units (all along the far east border of CO. Are there actually any elk out there? Not many I would think.



txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom