Colo Landowner Voucher Fiasco!

jims - if you would bother to read all of the posts, you would see that your question was answered several times! Face it man, your simply a COMMUNIST. You want only what's good for you, and any or all consideration to others, matters NOT!!
 
jims is a COMMUNIST because he's not 100% behind the landowners that have managed to get an "entitlement" program for themselves LOL!!!

Thats the best one I've heard yet about concerning this thread.
 
COHunter

Since when did ANY landowner gain property ownership through entitlement?? Pretty sure they bought, and paid for it!!! My lord, COMMUNISTS abound here. If you can't have it ALL, its not "fair"! I've seen less selfishness from a bunch of 3rd graders fighting over crayons, than those of you that feel you are ENTITLED to it ALL!

Landowners ONLY get 15% of the tags, but you guys think the "AVERAGE JOE", is entitled to every single one of them. Regardless of the role others play (landowners for example), in cooperative efforts to further wildlife conservation.

No one else seems to be asking for ALL of the tags, except some of you "average Joe's", so who really is the one with the entitlement attitude???
 
LAST EDITED ON May-24-10 AT 07:30PM (MST)[p]Yes, and how exactly is it good for him? He is not likely to draw any of the tags that would be affected if the changes he wants were enacted. Just have a VERY slightly better chance or make it a 10 year wait instead of a 12 year wait.

Just because we fight for something doesn't mean it only affects us. I oppose most of the nonresident price increases even though I could afford a tag even if they doubled the present cost. But many have been priced out. Every baby step we take in that direction means it becomes more of a "rich man's" sport. And contrary to popular belief, we can't all be rich.

Last time I looked our society was based on free speech and the ability to try and convince others to change. Socialism says: that is the way it is, tough! Who is promoting socialism?

FYI: I personally own 1000 acres in Texas and have some extended family that owns 1800 acres in Colorado, so I think I have a perspective of both sides. From my point of view, landowners definately deserve compensation for what they are providing for wildlife. I just think there are better ways to accomplish this goal.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
That's how I see it txhunter58. Landowners deserve something from sportsmen. If a better solution comes about, then I personally have no problem with vouchers going away. I guess the problem I have is when I see people who want to do away with the vouchers with no other option. Basically, to me, they're saying, "landowners should support wildlife for us sportsmen for free". I don't agree with that.
I would not like to see 15% of tags given away in other states, but where it has already happened in Colorado, I don't think it's appropriate for sportsmen to try and pull that rug out from under landowners.
15% is a lot, and maybe over the years, with new programs created, that percentage can be reduced. But, I would count on it.......

If a NEW, BETTER system does not come about, then like others, I feel that some changes need to happen, because I do think it can be better, as can most programs.

This thread was started as an effort to rally people to write letters to the voucher committee to try a do away with vouchers altogether, and I don't think that should happen.

Sorry jims, I'm sure on most everything you and I would probably see eye to eye, but on this I just feel that landowners are important to sportsmen and we need to make wildlife important to them in order for us to maximize herds and quality.
I understand your frustration with people buying them every year, not loosing points, tag pimps making money off the vouchers, etc., but those things are part of what make the vouchers valuable to landowners. If a landowner can't sell the voucher, then often it is worthless.

Like txhunter58, I hate to see hunting become more and more of a rich dudes sport. I also don't like seeing opportunity lost to guys with more money, but at the same time, those rich guys do cover the cost of a lot. And in this case, they help reward landowners for supporting our wildlife.

Folks who care deeply about this stuff should attend meetings, write letters and do what they can. I'm guessing that some on that committee do keep an eye on MM to see how people feel about the issue. I know here in Utah, decision makers often watch the forums to get a feel for how sportmen feel about different issues that come up.

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
Something that seems to have been lost here.

When you fill out an the application for LO vouchers it says that the game must inhabit your property all year long. Not just during winter. If the land does not fit that requirement, and many of them don't, then they should not get a tag. But, it isn't checked by the DOW very often.

That invalidates some of the arguments being made here about game not being on the property during the regular hunting season.
 
?I certify that I am the deeded owner of the acreage listed above and/or submitted with this registration which is primarily used for agricultural purposes and is inhabited by the
species indicated above for the greater portion of the calendar year.here is the exact terminology on the application, which means greater than 6 months!!!
 
I don't believe I have ever stated in my posts that I would like to see vouchers totally eliminated? I have basically stated that I believe there should be changes to the current system that will benefit the majority of hunters in Colorado.

I definitely agree that landowners and their immediate families should be compensated for wildlife and for promoting wildlife habitat. I have a feeling all of us would have to agree on that?

My concern is for the majority of hunters in Colorado that patiently wait in line to draw tags. My concern is that:

#1) Why should voucher hunters (that aren't landowners) be able to step in front of the majority of other hunters that have waited 5 to 15+ years to draw high demand tags?

2) Why should voucher hunters (that aren't landowners) be able to bi-pass the pref pt system and hunt every year without using any pref pts and actually accumulate pref pts the years they purchase vouchers?

Preference points are used for just about every big game tag sold by the CDOW but why not landowner vouchers?

Believe me, landowners and brokers would have no problem selling vouchers even if pref pts were used when hunters purchased vouchers. Does that happen to make any sense?
 
>I don't believe I have ever
>stated in my posts that
>I would like to see
>vouchers totally eliminated? I
>have basically stated that I
>believe there should be changes
>to the current system that
>will benefit the majority of
>hunters in Colorado.
>
>I definitely agree that landowners and
>their immediate families should be
>compensated for wildlife and for
>promoting wildlife habitat. I
>have a feeling all of
>us would have to agree
>on that?
>
>My concern is for the majority
>of hunters in Colorado that
>patiently wait in line to
>draw tags. My concern
>is that:
>
>#1) Why should voucher hunters (that
>aren't landowners) be able to
>step in front of the
>majority of other hunters that
>have waited 5 to 15+
>years to draw high demand
>tags?
>
>2) Why should voucher hunters (that
>aren't landowners) be able to
>bi-pass the pref pt system
>and hunt every year without
>using any pref pts and
>actually accumulate pref pts the
>years they purchase vouchers?
>
>Preference points are used for just
>about every big game tag
>sold by the CDOW but
>why not landowner vouchers?
>
>Believe me, landowners and brokers would
>have no problem selling vouchers
>even if pref pts were
>used when hunters purchased vouchers.
> Does that happen to
>make any sense?


jims - First off, landowners must use preference points that each application accumulates year to year, just as public hunters do, to draw!

I gave you the example above. Unit 61, 4th season buck tag, only 1 landowner voucher was available in 2009, and 17 LO applications applied for it. Each year an application does not draw a tag, it gets another point, just as you do. One can obviously see that many of the applications will accumulate lots of points, before it draws. So Landowners are waiting in line to draw and gaining points, just like you!

Secondly, what about hunters that have no points, and then want to buy a voucher? Hard to take something they don't have. Plus, since the landowner is using points to draw in many cases, (most any application could have in 2010 was 8), and then take points from the hunter too, where's the logic in that?

Lastly, the biggest problem I have with some of your theories is that it simply furthers BIG GOVERNMENT. Here, we'll let you draw these landowner vouchers when you can, but then we will tell you how to use them too (ie - only to family members, etc). More government control is not what we need.

How in your search for "fairness", does any of that sound right? Besides man, we are only talking about 15% of the tags, that's it! Why is it such a shame for landowners to get 15% of the tags in a given unit, and do with them as they wish? Like one of the other posters stated above, if that 15% goes back to the public draw, your odds in many of these areas will increase by such a small margin, that it won't matter much anyway! But yet, you seem willing to risk all that landowners do for wildlife, simply so they can't share a small piece of the pie, AT ALL. Just seems selfish to me.
 
Anotherhntr: why don't you sign your post with your actual name?

And why don't you get your facts straight before going on a rant accusing folks of communism? Spare us the name-calling, because it accomplishes nothing and you're the only one doing it.

Uh....I'm fairly sure landowners can collect preference points just like everyone else, so this nullifies your entitlement argument. In fact, the only entitlement going on here is you arguing that landowners should automatically get 15% of the tags, and with those vouchers they get to hunt the public land in the entire unit.

Can you explain the logical relation between owning land and automatically getting tags (which allow hunting outside of that land), regardless of how difficult it is for anyone else to get the tag for the public portion of the unit?

DougW
 
Here's the difference, "Anotherhntr", you're talking 3 or 4 points and we're talking 10 or 15, or sometimes more.

Also, by your rules equating the vouchers to public tages, then open up all of the private land to the public hunters who draw. Seems fair, right?, since the public land is all open to the private hunters who draw. Hmmmm, doesn't sound so good to you, does it?
 
Landowners certainly do profit off "entitlements" and the more land you own, the more of a gift you receive!

If you own 159 acres, you are SOL, but if you own 160+, you can make $10k by selling a deer tag, that is good on public land, to hunt a state owned animal. How is that not a gift?

On a side note, why can't I sell my tag? If I wait 10 years to draw a tag, and someone wants it so they can hunt a state owned animal, on public land, why can't I? Oh...because I don't own 160 acres.
 
4000fps,
Thats what I want to know? I drew a GMU 21 tag this year, why cant I sell it? I'd gladly sell it for $2500 or whatever they are going for this year.
 
>Here's the difference, "Anotherhntr", you're talking
>3 or 4 points and
>we're talking 10 or 15,
>or sometimes more.
>
>Also, by your rules equating the
>vouchers to public tages, then
>open up all of the
>private land to the public
>hunters who draw. Seems fair,
>right?, since the public land
>is all open to the
>private hunters who draw. Hmmmm,
>doesn't sound so good to
>you, does it?

Not necessarily correct! I know landowners that had 7-8 pref points on vouchers this year, and certainly will be lucky to draw a tag, when looking at the number of applications with the same points. GUARANTEED, before long some of the vouchers will be up to 10-15 pts to draw, just check the stats.

The private land vs public argument, I don't necessarily disagree with you on that one. Especially in areas where the unit is dominated by public land! But would you then agree that in places like eastern Colorado where 95% - 99% of the land is privately owned, that far more than 15% of the tags should go to the Landowner pool????


4000fps - Man, you keep going to this "entitlement" thing, with complete disregard for the fact that Landowners purchased and paid for their property with after tax dollars, and continue to pay COLORADO property taxes each and every year! They didn't get the land by some Entitlement program for the wealthy, that the rest of us were left out of. Its not entitlement, its called "property owner rights". As for the 160 acre thing, I guess they have to draw the line somewhere. What's wrong with them getting a small piece of the pie, that help help provide for?

Besides, NOTHING is stopping you guys from buying your own landowner tag, and accumulating points along the way. Why don't you just do the same?? Or is the answer, you can't afford it, so no one else should be able to do it either?? That is Socialism my friend! "Let us all live in misery together, rather than a few good men prosper". Hell, I can't afford a Ferrari either, but I am not trying to outlaw the sale of Ferrari's because someone else can. Good for them, its called the American Capitalist spirit, that allows us all to prosper should we so choose.

Lastly, as for selling your tags, I'm all for it! You don't need to convince me that it would be a good idea, if one chooses to do so. You need to convince the CDOW.
 
Now this debate is finally going somewhere. We now have a solution. Instead of limiting the landowners, lets just make ALL tags transferable.
 
jims & 4000fps - Below is a link you might want to have a look at. According to our federal govt, roughly 2/3 or 66% of Colorado is private land!!!!!!! So, wouldn't it be fair to say that the landowners are really the one's getting screwed??? They own the majority of the state, but get only a SMALL percentage of YOUR precious tags.

So who's really the one trying to ride the ENTITLEMENT train??

http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/BLM_Information/faqs/access.html
 
That is not a fair statistic. Break that down by unit. I am guessing that my unit is probably 95% public land, and most of the 5% of private is developed.

And regardless of the percentage, if 99% of the landowner tags are being used on PUBLIC land, then how does that statistic come into play at all? If landowner tags were only valid on the private land they originated from, then it would actually make some sense.
 
4000fps - Ok, so we are actually getting somewhere here. You're right, in all areas it would not make sense. The fact does remain though, that 2/3 of the state is private land, so the landowners deserve consideration. But either the CDOW needs to break it down from unit to unit, on a percentage basis of public vs private, (which would not take that much effort in my opinion, but likely will never happen), or find the next best solution. I would be ALL for making the landowner tags valid ONLY for private land, but how about ALL private land in that unit?? That way, if fellow landowners want to allow access to each others property, they can? Then they still have a decent value to the landowner, but yet the tag cannot be used to access any public land throughout the unit. What says you???
 
This bag of popcorn is nearly gone! I think I better go get some more at the grocery store.....




Sit tall in the saddle, hold your head up high, keep your eyes fixed to where the trail meets the sky...
 
anotherhntr - I'm pretty sure that the current private land only vouchers are good for all private ground in a unit. They're not specific to any parcel.

The eastern part of the state and western portions should probably be managed a little differently. If unitwide vouchers remain, maybe they should be given at the same percentage ratio as public to private land in each individual unit. Combined with more strict private land access and more strict private land habitat contribution, the system could be much better. Maybe they need to charge landowners a little more money to apply for some of the vouchers and use that money to have independent auditors evaluate private ground and give them scores based on what they provide for wildlife and then that score would give landowners preference in their landowner draw.....???????????????

I don't think unitwide vouchers are going away anytime soon. Do you guys who are against them really think they could be taken away?

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 
If every western state had a voucher system the same as Colorado what would vouchers cost? What state system do you prefer Utah? Nevada? Idaho? I wish every state did everything exactly like colorado! Not perfect but way better than the rest! Facts are facts Colorado population is 4.3 million with more game than any other western state.
 
My question is, How come they don't publish a list of Landowners who receive tags with contact info. And why don't they report how much each tag is sold for.
This should be made puplic. At least for Unit wide tags.

Steve
 
LAST EDITED ON May-26-10 AT 01:45PM (MST)[p]Another thing you guys forget...there are already "Private land only" tags set aside for each unit. There are always leftovers of those too. BUT...the landowners don't want those tags, because they cannot sell them, you might burn preference points to get them, and they are not valid on public.

So tell me again what the real need is for landowner tags, when the landowner already basically has a guaranteed hunt every year!
 
Arrowhead:

Wow, what an idea! A country where the only good hunting is too expensive for 90% of us. What a concept.

Congratulations, Arrowhead. We could then just leapfrog right to Europe's status: no game except on game farms.

Excellent idea!!!!!
 
4000fps - I would suggest you go back and read the CO regs. Not every unit has "Private Land Only" tags, NOT EVEN CLOSE. Those that do, the large majority are for rifle hunting only. Very, very few are for Muzzleloader & Archery hunts, and many of them are cow/doe tags. Show me a PLO tag for elk in 201,61, etc, that is not cow only, just as an example. Unit 61 deer, PLO deer tags are doe only, just another example.

So to say each unit already has PLO tags, and that solves the problem, is completely false.
 
In unit 44 they issued 20 tags last year for either sex deer, private land only. Last time I checked the 44 landowner tags were selling for $9k...

So, perhaps 44 should have ZERO landowner tags since they already get a gift of 20 tags, and other premium units get none.
 
Europe did i say anything about Europe? We can talk what ifs all day long. I am just looking at each states results i.e., (game populations) and Colorado looks to be doing a good job.
Wyoming does good job too but only has 500,000 people.
 
4000fps - That's a far cry from your original claim that EVERY unit already gets PLO tags!

Man, its very simple to see the real problem you have with this whole issue, JEALOUSY! You don't get paid for the tags, and can't afford one yourself, so that ain't "fair". And if you can't benefit in some way, then no one else should either. Good luck to you with that philosophy in life, its gonna be a tough go for ya!!
 
>That is not a fair statistic.
>Break that down by unit.
>I am guessing that my
>unit is probably 95% public
>land, and most of the
>5% of private is developed.
>


Your unit??? Your unit???? Do I have to say it again..YOUR UNIT??? Since it's yours, you should be the only one hunting on it then, right?

Asshat...
 
Every house in Colorado happens to be in a unit. My house happens to be in the same unit I hunt. Why is that hard for you to understand? I also have "my town" "my county" "my state" and "my country".

Wish someone would please explain to me again why a landowner can sell a license to hunt a state owned animal on public land, and nobody else is allowed to sell their license to hunt a state owned animal, on public land.

Certainly that is something that could be decided in the courts...
 
In colorado there is something for everyone if they get out and give it a try. I have hunted the past 7 years in row. I drew first choice in 2003 bought one voucher and hunted second choice units every other year. I have had good hunting every year and killed bucks 6 of the 7 years all over 170. You have to put effort out but the opportunity is there. If you try to hunt the top rated units because you want an easy big buck you will pay through the nose either through points or money but I agree Colorado has the best system out there. Nobody cared about vouchers in 2003 because the hunting was just coming on and hardest draws before that were the PLM areas. Whether or not you buy or like vouchers private landowners feeling the wildlife has value benefits opportunity for all of us.
 
>Wish someone would please explain to
>me again why a landowner
>can sell a license to
>hunt a state owned animal
>on public land, and nobody
>else is allowed to sell
>their license to hunt a
>state owned animal, on public
>land.
>
>Certainly that is something that could
>be decided in the courts...

Well, since you seem to be on the "fair" bandwagon, I guess its just one of those things that you will have to learn to deal with. LIFE, it just ain't fair!!!

But, you make a good point. I think you should personally take up the fight. You could sue the CDOW, and the state of Colorado for not being "fair". Your entitled to sue whomever you like, so please, let us know how it goes?? Good Luck!!!
 
Basically the state of Colorado, the taxpayers, the ones who buy licenses are paying landowners to feed wildlife! just like a landowner gets paid to graze someone else's cattle, the system is'nt necessarily fair as far as the amounts, but if the landowner owns 160 acres if he is in a descent area at all they feed deer,elk or antelope! this is a way for them to pay the landowners to tolerate the wildlife! And like has already been posted! if they could only hunt private land this would not do the same thing!
 
LAST EDITED ON May-28-10 AT 04:51PM (MST)[p]Why do people assume private land is the place deer and elk do the majority of their feeding, so a landowner needs compensated? I would venture to guess that in most western units, the animals feed all summer on forest service, and most of the winter feeding areas are on BLM. So actually, the taxpayer is footing the bill. Deer browse anyway, most of what they are eating is native forbs, grass etc.

Maybe I should get a landowner tag for the starlings that nested on my house, are crapping all over my deck. Not to mention the doe and two fawns that fed on my shrubs all winter.
 
400ofps - Since when are landowners, NOT tax payers??? Man, I have given you tons examples of their benefits to wildlife, as have others. Plus, shot down most of your selfish ideas as to why only you are ENTITLED to the tags. Quite frankly I have grown tired of OWNING you on this subject! I wish you well in life, but rarely do selfish people get very far - good luck.

Besides, equating birds on your porch, which are likely not legal to hunt anyway, to the big-game/landowner voucher issue, is completely retarded!! If that's the best you can come up with, I think I've proved my point.
 
How about some facts. In Idaho- west side of star valley unit 76 a rancher hated elk on his property eating his grass and relentlessly complained to game and fish so they trapped 200 elk. Idaho called Wyoming and said we dont want these elk will you take them? Wyoming said sure and Idaho released them by Cokeville WYoming. You want more game or not? Maybe in your eyes the rancher should raise State owned elk just for you for free heck 200 elk dont eat that much grass.
 
And I am sure the rancher opened his land to hunters...yeah right.



FACTS:

1. If you own 160 acres, you can sell your deer tag, which is good on PUBLIC land.
2. If you own 159 or less, you cannot.
3. There are private land only tags available to landowners, but they do not want them, because they cannot sell them.
4. Hunters are not allowed to sell their tag, to hunt the very same animal in the very same spot.

You guys don't think people should have equal rights? This whole country was based on equality. We have passed laws against discrimination, but that only covers race, gender, and religion. Maybe they need to broaden it to cover people that own less than 160 acres.

Can't wait till this hits the courts!
 
fact -Wyoming solved the problem of elk on wintering on private ranches by creating 22 state run feed grounds that hunters pay for (which has worked) what is YOUR solution?
 
4000fps doesn't have a solution! He's infected with terminal "whining" disease. Just look back at this entire thread, all he does is whine, #####, piss and moan.

The real ironic thing is, he's on another post bitching because another hunter couldn't draw a tag with 16 points?? First he wants all the landowner tags in the public draw pool, then he wants that system changed too! I suspect the only thing that will make him happy is to have at least 1 tag set aside every for 4000fps, then ALL landowners must grant him access to their land (free of charge of course), as he should so be ENTITLED, and the rest of us must help him find a big deer!

Fact is, if 4000fps knew anything about finding & hunting big deer in CO, he wouldn't be bitching about get a tag at all. There are numerous hunts/units available, one can draw with 1-3 points, that provide an excellent opportunity to shoot a 180" - 200" deer, every time. Including rifle hunts. Instead of searching for these hunts, learning the areas, and how to hunt them, he sits on his computer whining about everything under the sun. PLEASE, for everyone's sake, act like a man, not like a teenage girl!!
 
Come on anotherhntr, you sound like a jerk now man. He has his opinion on the whole thing. You shouldn't say all that crap when you don't even know the guy. Cool it, please!!!!

Brian Latturner
MonsterMuleys.com
 

Similar threads

urge2hunt
Updated Mule Deer & Bull Elk Hunts for 2024
Replies
1
Views
2k
BUGLEnmIN
BUGLEnmIN
urge2hunt
Mule Deer Hunts Available for 2024
Replies
7
Views
2k
urge2hunt
urge2hunt
urge2hunt
Book Cliffs Deer Hunt - Limited Spots
Replies
0
Views
944
urge2hunt
urge2hunt

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

Wide Buck for COPLAINSHNTR
1670453756831.png
20171102_180254.jpg
7E201710-09EA-455D-A82B-C48F8D9092AD.jpeg
CA0E8FD0-70F3-4BBF-A073-9FF6E843468C.jpeg
thumbnail_image1.jpg
Screenshot_20200506-133635_Photos.jpg
08B238E8-7639-48A5-B488-EE25011AAB75.jpeg
C232C03C-BA31-4673-88F1-795728A8119D.jpeg
9CAC1351-8618-4550-AC45-D42C95ABA7F8.jpeg
Monster Bull
20230917_085446.jpg
Back
Top Bottom