Colorado Landowner Vouchers

[jims]

I don't know if many of you have heard of all the controversy lately in different newspapers and elsewhere but it sounds like the current Colo landowner voucher program definitely needs to be changed! I have a feeling this program originally was designed to reimberse ranchers and farmers for crop damage and use of private land by wildlife and to allow landowners access to tags so they could hunt their own property. The program was also designed to provide more hunting pressure on private land to move game to public land.

It is obvious that the current program is going astray and landowners are selling vouchers for big profits to outfitters and wealthy hunters. These vouchers are currently valid on both public and private land. Many of the landowners sign contracts with whoever buys the vouchers saying they will only hunt public land and not have access to their private property.

It only makes sense that landowner vouchers or tags be valid to hunt private land only. With all of the hunting pressure that is placed on public land in Colorado this sure makes sense to me and I sure hope the CDOW wakes up! If you ever have the chance to write, email, or speak to the CDOW I would certainly let them know your feelings on this subject. I have a feeling things are bound to change in the near future!

 

[TFinalshot]

I've read about, I think it is a huge problem. You could make the tags valid for private land only, or better, make them non transferable and allow a certain amount of trespass . . . Idaho, I believe has a similar issue with landowner tags. What people do on their private land is largely up to them, what they do with a public resouce, like game animals is a matter for the state too. I like the way montana does it. Montana has a block managment program. private land owners are paid by the state for hunter access. The money is generated by the hunting public through tag sales and each land owner that participates gets paid based on a number of criteria. Montana land owner tags also are not transferable.

 

[txhunter58]

"Many of the landowners sign contracts with whoever buys the vouchers saying they will only hunt public land and not have access to their private property."

As I understand it, any voucher that allows public land access requires that the landowner MUST allow access to their property as well. Therefore, even if they sign something stating that the voucher buyers will not have access, that contract should not be worth the paper it was written on. I realize that this is probably not how it is playing out in the real world, but any landowner that is not playing by the rules is supposed to get their tags taken away in the future if they are found out. I realize that is a big "if".

Seems like someone needs to send one of these "contracts" to the DOW. Maybe they can charge the tag brokers with breaking the law?

txhunter58

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

 

[Waygoner]

In most cases the hunter doesn't even know who the land owner is. They aren't required to disclose that information. I'm guessing most tags are sold through brokers and these voucher holders end up hunting public land.

I'd like to see the voucher program eliminated and the tags placed back in the public draw. The Colorado DOW has enough money to pay the land owners handsomely for crop damage, etc. It will never happen though, the vouchers have become too valuable and the wildlife commission protects the land owner's interests.

 

[JFWRC]

In NM, on the ELK System, we have "Unit Wide" and "Ranch Only". If the landowner signs the contract as Unit Wide, he must allow access to his ranch and the designation allows access to ALL Unit Wide ranches in the Unit and all Public Land having legal access. A hunter should do research to find these places before the hunts starts and lots of times there will be a honey hole. If a rancher signs his contract with the department as "Ranch Only", that means all hunters must hunt the deeded lands only and DO NOT have access to public lands. The Antelope system does not work this way. The Antelope System has similar terminolgy but it works differently on the UNIT WIDE designation. There are ranch assignments in this system. Should a hunter be assigned to a ranch signed up as UNIT WIDE and he wants to move to another ranch due to a lack of game typically, he or she must contact a Game Warden to request a move. The move cannot be made until the next hunting day. Recently, the department has moved toward harsher penalties for landowners violating the contract. I hope this will clean up some of the BS that does happen. Most landowners don't abuse the system. Some do and that's not good for any of us. Like in anything, there will be abuses. Someone out there cast the first stone....

 

[sneak]

Waygoner:

This was a very hot topic last winter when the Wildlife Commission was considering expansion of the voucher program. Check the archives for the threads as there were several. Here's one for you to get started:
http://www.monstermuleys.info/cgi-b..._thread&om=12554&forum=DCForumID6&archive=yes

I think Prism started another one called Landowner Tag Debate and Founder had a couple going as well. At least this will give you a start on understanding the program, how it is being abused and some pretty creative solutions that have been offered, but not yet adopted. I have to get to work but I'll check in again tonight and tell more of what I know.

 

[jims]

If it were up to me I'd prefer all tags offered in a drawing to the public and only a small portion available to private landowners that they could only use on their own land. This would eliminate a lot of what is going on. The rest of the tags would be offered in a public drawing to everyone.

From what I understand there was a new program started this year in 10 and 2 for elk that totally failed. Several elk tags were offered in the public draw that were available to hunt particular ranches in these units. In exchange the ranches were given several tags (which I heard sold for over $12,000 each). From what I heard the landowner ended up not allowing access to the property and it was a big battle for the public hunters?

I've never been a fan of New Mexico's draw system. Only a small percentage of the total licenses are available to nonresidents and then this is sliced into guide vs nonguided draw pools. The average Joe that can't afford New Mexico landowner tags is only given the opportunity to draw a small percentage of the total tags. I really believe the public should be given a large chunk of the available tags and given the opportunity to choose whether they'd like to hunt private, public, guided, or nonguided. Hunting accross North America has gone too much to a wealthy man's sport!

 

[rackem406]

I bought one of the evil vouchers this year and after seeing the issues first hand I agree that it needs to be reformed. It is a mistake to think that the landowner must give you access to his land to hunt. The verbage from CDOW is actually "the landowner must allow reasonable access." We called the landowner about hunting his property, because his name is on the voucher and I was able to track down his information. He basically had no idea what was going on. Really nice guy, but what it came down to was that a broker contacted him saying you are eligible for vouchers. Here's what you need to do do and then I'll pay you $XXX for them. So he had someone giving him an opportunity to make some money for filling out some paperwork and I think the smaller ranchers need every $ they can get, so he did it.

I also talked to a few wildlife officers, who by the way were very nice and helpful, and this seems to be a sore spot with them and they believe it is being totally abused. They said there are a lot of loopholes in the program and thats why you end up having these brokers with all the tags.

I think I see what they were trying to accomplish with this program, but it definitely needs to be reformed. I really don't know if I would buy one again with all the issues surrounding the program.


Rackem

http://www.needgod.com/

 

[JFWRC]

100% public draw doesn't work. Creates haven for elk as landowners don't let folks on their land. Its proven.....if a landowner puts folks in for the draw and they don't draw, they usually just don't hunt. This is what started the system of the 15% pool in CO in the 90's. Jims, I guess that means you don't like alot of the systems in the west because there are quotas in many of them. At least in NM the elk system allows much latitude. I know you don't like the antelope system, but all in all its works fairly well. I haven't drawn a public antelope tag ever. Non-residents have better odds than me. If you don't draw, you get a chance to buy a tag and yes, its market driven. Gotta love capitalism. Some folks win big, Ask the guys who started Utube.....