5 year season structure... Meetings/opinions?

[elks96]

So has anyone managed to make a meeting yet? I was hoping to hit the Meeker meeting last night but my wife got called into work so I did not make it. Grand Junction Meeting is tonight. I might try to make it.

So far only thing I have heard was talk about killing more bears. Possibly moving the bear hunts to a quota system like lions.

Also opening lion season during the combined deer elk for people with a tag with out hounds. Just in case you dumb luck into one.

Both of the above I would favor.. More tag sales and better kills on predators.

What do you think? What changes would you like to see?

 

[tailchasers]

Raise the elk hunting fee and include a bear license.

Offer a spring bear season.
Allow baiting or hounds for bears.

Just to throw out a few.

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."

 

[foulshot]

Went to the meeting in Co Springs.

Obviously the biologist at that meeting were answering questions from their area, mostly plains, but there was some talk still of lowering tag numbers.

Also brought up some opportunity for a longer later season youth hunt, moving the muzzie pronghorn dates to before rifle season.


I asked if they were watching the borders for hogs crossing from adjacent states, the unofficial comment was "shoot on site".

 

[Alamosa]

I stopped by the Pueblo meeting last night.

Big crowd of crusty old guys like me. There was no one younger than 50 there. The DOW was astonished at the turnout. They said that at some recent meetings attendance is 0.

There is some interest from hunters in bringing back preference point banking.

There are a number of areas under consideration for being removed from unlimited and changed to limited licensing. They have a map of the units under consideration along with different reasons why a given unit may change.

 

[fallguy]

I called the P&W Denver office and Pueblo office about the map showing GMU's under consideration for limited licensing and both said they didn't know of any map. I left a message with the reg manager so I may get that info later. Anyways can anyone on here share which GMU's are under consideration? Also did it appear that P&W is seriously considering bringing back points banking or just listening to input at this stage of the game?

 

[elks96]

The process for getting a limited unit must be hunter/community driven. The Parks and Wildlife does not drive that consideration. If hunters want to make a unit limited elk than they must do the leg work and present a proposal to the CPW. In that proposal it must contain support from a broad range of users/interested parties. Local businesses, town support, guide/outfitter support, ranchers, etc. If the proposal comes through with good support then the process moves forward and they will take a deeper look. As far as i know there is talk out there about potential units going limited, but none have cleared he first hurdle and that is a submitted proposal with broad support. After that I am certain the CPW would then form a panel/research team and do study/report. I am not aware of anything that has been presented, just a lot of talk.

I would say that the CPW is open to just about anything if it has good support from a variety of people. I however do not think that points banking will do anything. I spoke with a friend who is, for lack of a better term a statistician (work for large companies running data specific to insurance). He said that point banking would be a bad thing. That statistically the net results would be across the board point building and increased point requirements. He stated that a person with points would do 1 of 2 things. Hold onto points or dump them. The top end points pool would decrease a little and the top units may see less point growth, but it would still increase just at a slightly slower rate. He said the other effect would be much worse. As guys with mid range points 12-13 bail out. They will look for lesser hunts, all those guys would then increase the demand on a lesser tag thus accelerating point creep. This would mean that units would grow from 1-2 points to 3-4 points, etc. As those that dump points push up demand those that were hunting those units every other year, etc. will either jump to a lesser unit upping its demand or stay in the unit and end up building points. Either way, the net effect will not change the issue. It will slightly change top unit point creep but will in fact accelerate lesser unit point creep.

Only thing that can be done to fix points is increase tags offered or decrease demand....

 

[fallguy]

elks96

Thanks for the info. I agree with your comments on points banking and was just asking if it was seriously being considered.

 

[Alamosa]

It was misleading for me to call this a map of units under consideration. My bad.

The presenters did seem to feel this map was significant to the discussion. It was shown during the unlimited unit changes presentation and again when the meeting broke into smaller groups. To address specific changes they had gathered the limited/unlimited discussion around a large replica of this map that they had made.

http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCol...sonStructure/2013TotallyLimitedElkUnitMap.pdf

 

[fallguy]

Alamosa:

Did they give any indication as to which GMU's, if any, had a push going on to change to limited status?

 

[Alamosa]

No.
They are reluctant to comment on what possible changes seem to have momentum behind them

 

[ColoradoOak]

I would bet money you won't see any changes in limited units. The process is set up so that the onus is on those who want more or fewer limited units to gather support from local stakeholders (County Commissioners, landowners, outfitters, livestock operators, etc). CPW will do none of the legwork. Nobody has the initiative to go through that process.

 

[foulshot]

Oak, that is the exact situation that jlmatthew and I spoke to the CPW folks about at the Co Springs meeting. You look at who those initiatives have to get through and start thinking there is just as much chance for a snowball in hell.

 

[elks96]

>Oak, that is the exact situation
>that jlmatthew and I spoke
>to the CPW folks about
>at the Co Springs meeting.
> You look at who
>those initiatives have to get
>through and start thinking there
>is just as much chance
>for a snowball in hell.
>

I am glad it is that way. Thus no one group or person has control over the fate of a unit.

 

[TheKnack]

The CPW sent me a notification but I was unable to attend. I still filled out my comments on the season structure comment form they sent.
Hopefully they still look at them for us guys who work crazy schedules.

 

[foulshot]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-02-14 AT 05:35PM (MST)[p]You might be, but collectively those groups seem to think the same way and typically in my experience do not think like the DIY OYA hunter. They tend to think about the almighty, and I don't mean the Lord....

 

[foulshot]

>The CPW sent me a notification
>but I was unable to
>attend. I still filled out
>my comments on the season
>structure comment form they sent.
>
>Hopefully they still look at them
>for us guys who work
>crazy schedules.

That was mentioned in the meeting I went to. I also brought some forms home to fill out and send it later. They also mentioned mass conference calls with both residents and non-residents.

 

[TheKnack]

foulshot-Thanks for the reply and attending.
Hopefully we get good results when the final season structure is set in stone.

Great to see that some of us here walk the talk if you know what I mean.
Good luck this season guys.
Jerry

 

[Skeet]

This map is not even correct. Units 66 & 67 have been limited for a very long time. Interesting?????

 

[COHunter]

Other than hopefully getting the pronghorn muzzleloader season moved ahead of the rifle season, I bet everything else will be the same as the last 5 years

 

[foulshot]

>foulshot-Thanks for the reply and attending.
>
>Hopefully we get good results when
>the final season structure is
>set in stone.
>
>Great to see that some of
>us here walk the talk
>if you know what I
>mean.
>Good luck this season guys.
>Jerry


I've been a little slow in getting involved, but I'm on board now.

Zach