License Distribution/Preference Points Focus Group For Future Seasons

[txhunter58]

People say: “ elk hunting is expensive before you even get to the tag, so just pay up and don’t complain”

In the past, there was always a 20 something hunter or a an older hunter who just don’t have much money. As a group that was going anyway, we let them tag along and not have to pay their fair share of travel costs, ect. They just had to buy the tag. Always good to have another young packer anyway!

Now days, young guys and some others can’t even afford the tag any more. Just another way we are losing youth from the great experience called elk hunting.

 

[PRCnut]

Prc there is truth to what you are saying with population increase driving up some, which is another reason to allocate more tags to Res. The unit in question is around 3/1 NR to R applications after being mentioned in some western hunting magazines

Social media is a big killer to hunting for sure!

 

[WesternSky]

People say: “ elk hunting is expensive before you even get to the tag, so just pay up and don’t complain”

In the past, there was always a 20 something hunter or a an older hunter who just don’t have much money. As a group that was going anyway, we let them tag along and not have to pay their fair share of travel costs, ect. They just had to buy the tag. Always good to have another young packer anyway!

Now days, young guys and some others can’t even afford the tag any more. Just another way we are losing youth from the great experience called elk hunting.

I have to disagree slightly, a kid can make $13 an hour at McDonald’s. One 8 hour shift would pay for an elk tag if R prices were doubled. That’s a different story for a NR young adult but hunting out of state can be expensive in general.
I have twin 15 y/o nephews that love hunting and have bought most of their gear because they love hunting and chose to spend their money there instead of other things like a new play station. I recognize this would be way harder for a young adult that wanted to try hunting, without a family that’s done it, but a resident won’t be limited just by a tag increase.

 

[txhunter58]

I have to disagree slightly, a kid can make $13 an hour at McDonald’s. One 8 hour shift would pay for an elk tag if R prices were doubled. That’s a different story for a NR young adult but hunting out of state can be expensive in general.
I have twin 15 y/o nephews that love hunting and have bought most of their gear because they love hunting and chose to spend their money there instead of other things like a new play station. I recognize this would be way harder for a young adult that wanted to try hunting, without a family that’s done it, but a resident won’t be limited just by a tag increase.

NR youth was my whole point. Many residents seem to be think it is fine to control NR hunter numbers with price. Or reduce our numbers with limited tags and make up the entire shortfall that causes with NR price increases.

Easy fix! Raise NR elk tag to $1500 and you won’t have to limit our numbers. We will do it for you. But that is a sad commentary on how todays hunters treat each other.

 

[HntHrdr]

I have to disagree slightly, a kid can make $13 an hour at McDonald’s. One 8 hour shift would pay for an elk tag if R prices were doubled. That’s a different story for a NR young adult but hunting out of state can be expensive in general.
I have twin 15 y/o nephews that love hunting and have bought most of their gear because they love hunting and chose to spend their money there instead of other things like a new play station. I recognize this would be way harder for a young adult that wanted to try hunting, without a family that’s done it, but a resident won’t be limited just by a tag increase.

Shoot McD’s is paying 18+ an hour at a lot of places in Co

 

[droptine47]

Hunting is probably in-line with everything else. $20k razors and snowmobiles. $100/round golf. Who knows on boats and campers. Diesel trucks… Everything is freaking expensive. Wish there was a way to add more critters but good luck getting CPW/USFS/BLM/developers/CDOT/etc all on the same page. Anyone know Elon Musk? Maybe he can buy up all the private ground and turn it into nature preserves. What about restricting/limiting access to places? I am guilty as anyone and easy access has added to the downfall in hunting. More walking and horses for a trade off in opportunity? Unfortunately we can’t have it all anymore and if everyone wants opportunity, something has to give. Going to have to compromise on some things or it’s only going to get worse.

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Regardless of the splits I think everyone can agree that OTC elk hunting is not sustainable in this day and age.

 

[Bookhead]

Regardless of the splits I think everyone can agree that OTC elk hunting is not sustainable in this day and age.

Depends what you're trying to sustain. Trophy quality? Then no. Colorado has more elk then any state with the otc tags

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

Depends what you're trying to sustain. Trophy quality? Then no. Colorado has more elk then any state with the otc tags

The numbers are dwindling fast. CPW has had numerous meetings about poor calf recruitment and struggling herd numbers. They've already started making archery limited in previously OTC units. I believe this move was partly a feeler to see how the public would react. It is impossible to manage a herd when you have no idea how many people are actually hunting it and how many elk are actually being killed.

 

[Bookhead]

The numbers are dwindling fast. CPW has had numerous meetings about poor calf recruitment and struggling herd numbers. They've already started making archery limited in previously OTC units. I believe this move was partly a feeler to see how the public would react. It is impossible to manage a herd when you have no idea how many people are actually hunting it and how many elk are actually being killed.

Agreed they do the same thing here in wyo. No idea what's getting killed

 

[twopointdn]

Two things from me.

Add point averaging so friends, family, or new entry kids can hunt together even though they do not have the same amount of points. Wyoming would be the model for this.

Change to 50/50 with 50% of the tags allocated to the high point tag holder and 50% in a random draw. Utah would be the model for this. It is nice to have some hope to draw a tag each year while you get closer to the guarantee draw. Point creep still happens in the hard to draw units but at least you have a chance each year as you are going along for the ride.

No point system is perfect but it seems that Nevada is the closest and Colorado’s straight preference point system is the furthest away for perfect. I hate preference points.

Just my thoughts.

 

[elks96]

Eliminate the points all together. End it immediately. Return the system back to a random draw. For those currently with points, allow those points to be squared bonus points until the system is clean of points, but no new points added...

Allocations, keep the OTC tags and keep as much of Colorado OTC as possible. Leave the residents to hunt state wide OTC, but cap the NR OTC licenses to a certain number. Do this for all seasons. Allow as much freedom for tag holders as possible and do not force them to pick a unit.

For sheep moose and goat, keep it the same. Bonus points are ok, keep the cost down and allow families the ability to apply. The new system is much friendlier to those of us with families who hunt. Under the old system it was almost impossible for a family of 4 or 5 to apply for sheep, goat or moose... Under the new system we can apply for all...

 

[Phantom Hunter]

I am another “Texan” that will not continue to hunt elk if price goes up significantly. Most states have priced me out already. I am getting close to being too old for a flat lander to chase elk but I feel really sorry for my son and grandkids. I doubt they will be able to enjoy hunting public land for elk like I have done. Sad

 

[SanJuan]

The only fair comparison is maybe Idaho. The rest of the states mentioned have better success rates and trophy potential. If you think NRs will pay $1000 for the low odds of success in CO, you are kidding yourself, and the CPW knows it. I would pay double CO price for AZ or Utah.

And I love the “everyone is jumping off a cliff so we should too” price mentality. Colorado has by far the most elk of any state. They should be leading, not following. They have enough elk to go around without screwing the NRs.

The only reason CO doesn't have better success rates and trophy potential is because we pimp out too many tags to non residents. Cut non res pressure and the tags will be worth more. Problem solved!

 

[BigChiefJ]

Like others have said, I also like the idea of averaging points or banking points.

Also anything that makes the draw more random. I would like 100% random, but some form of bonus points would be better than the current system. Even making the draw 50% points/random split would be better.

 

[jls456]

If I was king for a day in Colorado the only thing I would change is point averaging. I know a lot of high point holders that would put in with there kids or friends and quit chasing the higher point hunts. Anytime a high point holder leaves the pool it is a good thing.

Very good idea.I could share my points with my grandsons.

 

[elks96]

The only thing that averaging or banking will do
Is create hyper inflation in points needed for mid and low end units.

wait until that unit that took 3 points suddenly take 6-9 all because people are jumping ship.

Banking and averaging will accelerate creep on everything except the top units…

 

[ORIONTHEHUNTER]

The only thing that averaging or banking will do
Is create hyper inflation in points needed for mid and low end units.

wait until that unit that took 3 points suddenly take 6-9 all because people are jumping ship.

Banking and averaging will accelerate creep on everything except the top units…

That would only happen for the first two to three years and then it would level out. They have done it once but only for a year. I would like to see them try it for at least a five year season structure period.

 

[txhunter58]

The only reason CO doesn't have better success rates and trophy potential is because we pimp out too many tags to non residents. Cut non res pressure and the tags will be worth more. Problem solved!

You may get better success rates. But it won’t help trophy potential.

 

[schmalie79]

You may get better success rates. But it won’t help trophy potential.

Is that what is meant; “worth”?

 

[whitwell_56]

To fight point creep
1. Full fee up front
2. No preference point only hunt code
3. Stop the tag turn in and keep your points unless you have a bona fide reason.

 

[DirtyTough]

The only thing that averaging or banking will do
Is create hyper inflation in points needed for mid and low end units.

wait until that unit that took 3 points suddenly take 6-9 all because people are jumping ship.

Banking and averaging will accelerate creep on everything except the top units…

Agreed. The only thing banking, sharing, boosting, whatever flavor you want to call it will do is increase point creep.

Let’s say I want to hunt 54 this year. I can easily draw second but not third season. If there was banking I could hunt second twice. If there was sharing I would get myself and my brother drawn this year. (He burned his points last year)

If it stays the same my points allow me to hunt this year.

It’s extremely basic. If someone’s points can draw more than one tag it will increase creep. If there is already bad creep why would they introduce a method that makes it worse?

 

[Pinlard]

I really like the idea of freezing all points and going to a random draw with the existing point holders having squared chances. Then as the people with squared points slowly draw out and become like everyone else. But everyone still has at least one chance. Also say 90/10 split to residents. It is the way of the west!

 

[elks96]

That would only happen for the first two to three years and then it would level out. They have done it once but only for a year. I would like to see them try it for at least a five year season structure period.

Do you really think that the points will go back down? Seriously? Once the units inflate that will be the new point total required going forward. Sorry but there is no way that the point creep will reverse. It will still go higher.

 

[Stevo]

Lots of interesting options on here. Most if the time any changes are made to the draw system, it benefits those with fewer points, not those that have been applying for 20+ years. It has to do with the new catch phrase "equitable." Equitable means equal outcomes, not equal opportunity. Some above have asked "what's wrong with current system." My thought is some younger hunters realize they have to wait 20-30 years (at current point levels not accounting for creep) to draw a "premium" tag in Colorado, and they see it as not fair. Going to a hybrid draw such as Utah limited entry tags, where 1/2 tags go to highest point holders and 1/2 are in a random draw would only make the point creep worse. This only helps the lower point holders.
I agree that the OTC elk tags need to go. Make everyone who wants to hunt have to buy the small game license, etc to get to hunt and make it a draw system where at least CPW can control the number of tags in each unit.
Like some above have stated, I would personally like to see averaging points for a group. I have been able to introduce new hunters to western big game hunting in the Utah general deer season because of averaging my points when they have none. I would love to average my 8 elk points with my dad's 4 and let us draw a pretty good hunt with 6 each. Would allow more turnover of points in my opinion.
I also agree with the idea that if you get a tag, you use your points (or 1/2 your points, or don't gain a preference point that year, etc.) for that species. I'm guessing the majority of us that hunt Colorado have taken advantage of this over the years by getting a preference point and still getting to hunt, but I don't see this as a sustainable option. I'm guessing this is likely the number one factor causing point creep?
Anyways, good luck to everyone in the draw this year, unless of course you're trying to get the same tag as me

 

[SanJuan]

You may get better success rates. But it won’t help trophy potential.

Reduced hunting pressure would result in an increased age class and therefore more trophy class animals.

 

[txhunter58]

Reduced hunting pressure would result in an increased age class and therefore more trophy class animals.

Research I have seen says age class/trophy potential won’t rise until you cut hunters by half. CPW won’t let that happen.

Less hunters will kill basically the same amount of elk until you get to that 50% level. Thus rising success rates.

Rising success rates would be great in themselves. If you get your success rate up from 1 in 5 to 1 in 3, you have a better product

 

[SanJuan]

Research I have seen says age class/trophy potential won’t rise until you cut hunters by half. CPW won’t let that happen.

Less hunters will kill basically the same amount of elk until you get to that 50% level. Thus rising success rates.

Rising success rates would be great in themselves. If you get your success rate up from 1 in 5 to 1 in 3, you have a better product

That seems counterintuitive. Care to share this research?

 

[Deercy]

People say: “ elk hunting is expensive before you even get to the tag, so just pay up and don’t complain”

In the past, there was always a 20 something hunter or a an older hunter who just don’t have much money. As a group that was going anyway, we let them tag along and not have to pay their fair share of travel costs, ect. They just had to buy the tag. Always good to have another young packer anyway!

Now days, young guys and some others can’t even afford the tag any more. Just another way we are losing youth from the great experience called elk hunting.

32 nonresident trucks at a trailhead in the sangres early September last year seems a bit excessive.

 

[txhunter58]

That seems counterintuitive. Care to share this research?

A quick search didn’t turn up that study. I sent an email to ask CPW if they put that out or know of it. Will let you know.

Seems very intuitive to me. If you get hunter numbers where they should be, less excess hunters in the woods, less running elk to private, increased success rate. If you think about a valley you have hunted where when the sun comes up there are orange dots all over it…. Let’s say 10 hunters. Maybe 2 of those will get an elk there. If there were only 6 hunters, wouldn’t they still kill those same 2 elk?

 

[grosventrehunter]

Now, if we can just limit the number of Colorado folks on the Mile and Platte River, I would promise to never hunt Colorado again. Please.....

 

[SanJuan]

A quick search didn’t turn up that study. I sent an email to ask CPW if they put that out or know of it. Will let you know.

Seems very intuitive to me. If you get hunter numbers where they should be, less excess hunters in the woods, less running elk to private, increased success rate. If you think about a valley you have hunted where when the sun comes up there are orange dots all over it…. Let’s say 10 hunters. Maybe 2 of those will get an elk there. If there were only 6 hunters, wouldn’t they still kill those same 2 elk?

I would agree that in easily accessible public the harvest would be similar but even there few more would probably slip through. In less accessible spots harvest could be reduced significantly by reducing tags. Private land would definitely see a reduction in harvest by limiting non res pressure as the majority of pressure on private comes from out of staters.

I don't see any way that trophy quality wouldn't improve with even small reduction in pressure.

 

[txhunter58]

I bet they will protect private land tags for NR. Prob private land only tags will be exempt?

 

[SanJuan]

I bet they will protect private land tags for NR. Prob private land only tags will be exempt?

I am skeptical that anything will change, CPW is just too greedy. If it did I would guess that private land only would be exempt. That being said there are plenty of animals harvested on public land by people with private that allows better access to the public.

 

[fullcry]

Bottom line is there is never going to be enough tags for everyone.
If you draw any tag you lose your points.
Even if you ride this wave of kids wanting to go to 90/10 or what ever.
Odds are Overall Your kids will NEVER hunt the
Preimium units.Ask anyone in Idaho,it’s not the NR that are jacking the odds it’s the newbies moving in.
Just to many people wanting to hunt in more and more locked up land.
No state should have OTC tags for any thing.
You can’t tell me they can’t manage better than that?
Help me under stand how the city of Boulder can own 30,000 acres and ban hunting?

 

[txhunter58]

It’s a tall order to get to 80/20. I would be shocked if you got that done this year. Too much money involved.

If I was a resident I would go one step at a time.

First up: all elk limited.

If you can get that done this time, it’s a big victory. And a first step for limiting res/NR

 

[Broomer]

If I was king for a day in Colorado the only thing I would change is point averaging. I know a lot of high point holders that would put in with there kids or friends and quit chasing the higher point hunts. Anytime a high point holder leaves the pool it is a good thing.

Bingo!!!!

 

[Broomer]

I don't think so. I draw a second choice PLO B list cow tag every year. This allows me to put meat in the freezer and gain a point. Also I am done with the chasing of big point areas, its just not worth it to me. I drew a 61 first rifle bull tag in 2020 and it was absolutely NOT worth the points it took. If the second choice is an A list license maybe, but as far as a B list nobody should have to burn points on a second choice B list license.

No elk unit in Colorado is worth more than 5 points so I like the idea of going random/lottery.

 

[SanJuan]

It’s a tall order to get to 80/20. I would be shocked if you got that done this year. Too much money involved.

If I was a resident I would go one step at a time.

First up: all elk limited.

If you can get that done this time, it’s a big victory. And a first step for limiting res/NR

All of the units that have been converted to draw for archery recently have people drawing in the second and third choices so the NR cap goes out the window. Moving all of the OTC units to draw only will do nothing to limit NR pressure.

There is no reason to get rid of OTC for residents. Make it OTC for residents and draw for NR just like Wyoming general.

And keep pushing for 90/10. If other states can balance their budgets at 90/10, so can CPW.

 

[txhunter58]

That was true of archery tags in the south west the first year they came out, but they have already lowered Those tag numbers significantly

Sure there are reasons to go to limited for residents. You just dont agree. There have been some Good ones already stated.

Keep dreaming, you aren’t getting it to 90/10 in my lifetime. You won’t even get it to 80/20 this go around. But if you succeed in getting at least NR limited, you are half way there.

 

[SanJuan]

The fact that CPW's greed is a huge hurdle to this doesn't mean that we shouldn't ask for what should and could be done.

 

[LIK2HNT]

Guess like everything else. Make one small group pay the most and get the least. Blame them for all your other problems.

Just like sending my children to college. Work my ass off since a kid. Saving and investing for the future of my family. Children get no help in college cause parents have saved money. They are last in line for advisory help, class selection, etc. Guess that’s what you call white privilege.

 

[txhunter58]

The fact that CPW's greed is a huge hurdle to this doesn't mean that we shouldn't ask for what should and could be done.

You have a big part in that issue. Because of residents such as you that think NR tags should be more than 10x res cost, you allowed the CPW to get dependent on our money. Can’t blame us for that.

 

[txhunter58]

Does anyone know the actual current resident versus nonresident tag numbers statewide

 

[Broomer]

1- No buying points

2- You have to apply to gain a point

3- maybe Colorado as well as all states implement a two tiered system. One for hunters wanting a quality trophy type hunt, and two for the opportunity guys. On the first Like sheep/goat/moose do a 5 point preference for deer/elk before you are eligible to be in the draw(still require to apply). Then all with 5 points go into the draw random. On the second, just make it random. This kind of system separates the hunters who are always going to go hunt year year from those who are willing to wait.

On tag allocation to NR: Each state does it different and as for all of us, because we are all NR of another state, why are we promoting tag allocation when ultimately it takes away opportunities for “US ALL”? I mean I haven’t had a deer/elk tag in my home state of Utah for 10 years because I find better opportunities in all surrounding states and everyone reading this can do that too. If you aren’t Hell bent on hunting in your state then just chill out and go to another state and explore those opportunities. But if residents keep complaining and fighting for 90/10 or whatever then they may not even still get drawn in their own state and now they’ve shoot themselve in the foot because the other states are 90/10 or worse. Don’t understand this mentality!! States want NR revenue and their Tourism.

 

[Conrad8899]

If I was a Colorado resident I would be pushing a 90/10 or a hard nonresident cap on all seasons... All antlered tags would use resident or nonresident points even reissued tags... Reissued tags would go to resident first nonresidents second... All tags would be turned back in before Mid August if tags are turned in after the deadline U loose Ur points and money unless there is a damm good reason and proof the reason is leggett...

 

[txhunter58]

Broomer: I understand the argument to not allow someone to just buy a point. It makes high point holders fish or cut bait. But it also does 2 other things:

More people with more points in the actual draws = lower odds

If people really just want a point, they just apply for a hunt, they don’t have a realistic chance to draw. Also increasing the applicants in the high point draws. It used to be that way and that’s what I did. If I had 3 points, I would apply for a hunt that required 10

 

[Country]

I say get rid of the ability to surrender your tag and keep your points. Go to Wyoming rules, you need a life changing event to turn your tag in and get your money back. This will make people really think about whether or not they are going to hunt Colorado or not, I know a. Lot of people that put in for Colorado and will turn in their tag if they draw something better in another state.

 

[SanJuan]

You have a big part in that issue. Because of residents such as you that think NR tags should be more than 10x res cost, you allowed the CPW to get dependent on our money. Can’t blame us for that.

I never said that NR should pay 10x nor did I have any ability to prevent the CPW from getting bloated on NR money.

 

[txhunter58]

SanJuanSlayer:
"I'm all for paying more for my tags if we get a 90/10 split but there is no reason not to raise NR prices to be on par with other states"

Uh, yes, you sort of did.....

We already pay more than 10x and you want to raise us even more....

 

[Bookhead]

I think a 500$ minimum for a deer tag is pretty on par with other states. 90$ small game licence to apply and 412$ deer tag

 

[Bookhead]

That's if you draw the first year you apply

 

[txhunter58]

Have you guys really even looked at the math? I just did and am pretty sure you will not get down to anywhere close to even 80/20. I think your best bet is to make NR elk tags draw only, and shoot for a cap on ALL elk NR elk tags at 35% (20% for hard to draw units). That would reduce NR hunters by 22% The CPW said they are open to suggestions as long as they are "revenue neutral"

Easy to say, "lets go to X%" but lets look at the math:

Colorado sells in the neighborhood of 210,000 elk tags. and as near as I can figure, about 45% of those are non residents. That means aprox 115,000 res and 95,000 NR. I would agree that this is way too high NR tags sold!

So lets go to 80/20. The residents stay the same at 115,000.

First math problem. 115,000 is 80% of what?

115,000 divided by 0.8 = 143,750 total hunters. Down from 210,000! Sounds good!

So now we have 115,000 res and 28,750 NR (down from 95,000!)

next math problem: how many less NR hunters?
95,000 - 28,750 = 66,249 less NR hunters

Loss in revenue is 66,240 x $690/ tag = $45,711,810

If NR are supposed to make up that shortfall, how much do you have to sell tags for:

45,711,810 divided by 28,750 = $1590

Total cost of NR elk tag = current price: $690 + additional shortfall: $1590 = $2280

How many of those do you think you would sell?

What is we jack up the price of residents by $100?

115,000 x $100= $1,150.000............. Only $44M more to go

And guess what.................
That doesn't even take in consideration the loss of revenue for making deer/ antelope ect 80/20%...... At least they are already at 35%

You might get the CPW to tighten their belt some, but not that far. Its not gonna happen

 

[txhunter58]

I had trouble finding exact numbers of NR elk tags sold recently, so if anyone has better numbers, please post link and I will redo my math.

 

[SanJuan]

Explain why it is so much more expensive to manage wildlife in CO than any other western state. Why does CPW need that extra $45,000,000? I'm not asking if they will give it up, we already agree on the fact that they won't. I'm asking why these other states are so much more efficient with their budgets.

 

[SanJuan]

SanJuanSlayer:
"I'm all for paying more for my tags if we get a 90/10 split but there is no reason not to raise NR prices to be on par with other states"

Uh, yes, you sort of did.....

We already pay more than 10x and you want to raise us even more....

I never wanted the CPW to get addicted to the massive revenue they receive from issuing way to many non resident tags. I've always been in favor of NR tags costing more than res tags.

Just to be clear I apply in nine states as a NR and I don't go bitching about the fact that I pay way more for tags or the fact that I am in the pot for up to 10% of the tags. It's just part of it. I paid over $1,000 for my Montana tag last year and I was happy to have it. If you can't afford it then work harder or stay home.

 

[LIK2HNT]

Any guess what kind of point creep not having OTC elk tags will create, along with cutting tags? A lot of people don’t apply and just show up, purchase their tags and go hunting. Now if you have to buy points for what use to be OTC, might as well wait for a better tag.

 

[LIK2HNT]

How about no more guiding and outfitting. Let the true hunters hunt. ???

 

[JakeH]

Explain why it is so much more expensive to manage wildlife in CO than any other western state. Why does CPW need that extra $45,000,000? I'm not asking if they will give it up, we already agree on the fact that they won't. I'm asking why these other states are so much more efficient with their budgets.

Didn't they encorperate the parks and rec into there system several years ago? Most other states wildlife agencies are truly wildlife agencies. Not money hubs for non wildlife programs.

 

[txhunter58]

I never wanted the CPW to get addicted to the massive revenue they receive from issuing way to many non resident tags. I've always been in favor of NR tags costing more than res tags.

Just to be clear I apply in nine states as a NR and I don't go bitching about the fact that I pay way more for tags or the fact that I am in the pot for up to 10% of the tags. It's just part of it. I paid over $1,000 for my Montana tag last year and I was happy to have it. If you can't afford it then work harder or stay home.

Colorado has more than twice as many elk as any other state and has more terrain above 10,000 ft than all other western states confined. That’s a partial answer.

But I agree: no government agency thinks any amount is too much and I have NEVER seen one give it up once they are getting it. I have zero input into their budget decisions, just as I have zero into what Colorado charges me. That’s on you.

 

[Country]

Get rid of the ability to turn your tag in. Make it like Wyoming where it takes a life changing event to turn it in. Will make people think about whether they really want to hunt Colorado or not and not give them an easy way out if they draw a tag in another state.

 

[HntHrdr]

Does anyone know the actual current resident versus nonresident tag numbers statewide

I know for archery OTC this year was 48k res to 51 or 54k non res, I’m not sure about the other seasons breakdown though

 

[HntHrdr]

Didn't they encorperate the parks and rec into there system several years ago? Most other states wildlife agencies are truly wildlife agencies. Not money hubs for non wildlife programs.

And here in lies the problem with the CPW… when it was the Dow it was better. When they did that combining they also discovered an accounting error in the neighborhood of 27 million that the parks was in the hole… so you can imagine they were more than happy to have one of the most profitable state agencies, division of wildlife to combine with

 

[BLOK2003]

Overcrowding is a major problem. When your on a ridge opening morning and can glass up 20-25 hunters in the same drainage thats a few miles from the main road system. Bullets whizzing by-it gets pretty scary at times. OTC elk hunts going on at the same time as the deer hunts ?

 

[HntHrdr]

No State Treats Resident Big Game Hunters Worse than Colorado- Tag Allocation- Hiding in Plain Sight. The Secret to the Elk and Deer Tags in Colorado. - Jurisdiction on Federally Owned Public Lands

Colorado has finally proposed a Senate Bill, SB 21-150 Reserve Big Game Hunting Licenses for Residents, to ease resident hunter frustration as a result of a tag allocation bias inflicted on resident hunters for decades ----when compared to other western states. Elk hunting in Colorado. Deer...

publiclandjurisdiction.com

Those in this thread may be interested in this article lays out a lot of the gripes us Res have with actual numbers, the evidence is pretty damming and hard to argue with. So take a look if you have a few minutes

 

[COLOelkman]

Does anyone know the actual current resident versus nonresident tag numbers statewide

I've tried looking but as far as I know, the website only shows draw tag numbers. I was trying to find OTC numbers but haven't seen anything anywhere that shows that. I'm sure CPW knows but not sure if you'd have any luck calling them to ask for OTC data but that'd be my only thought but I'm guessing OTC numbers are pretty big.

 

[Cohntr62]

Can you push for a truly random draw for NR?

If that happened, it would probably end our Colorado hunting trips. What we've been doing is coming out every other year and getting a PP in the off years. This has enabled us to draw our tag consistently which means we are able to make plans and schedule vacations from work. Not having that high probability would be a problem. Without the PP system, you could never make plans until after the drawing and that is way too late for many workplaces.

 

[txhunter58]

If that happened, it would probably end our Colorado hunting trips. What we've been doing is coming out every other year and getting a PP in the off years. This has enabled us to draw our tag consistently which means we are able to make plans and schedule vacations from work. Not having that high probability would be a problem. Without the PP system, you could never make plans until after the drawing and that is way too late for many workplaces.

That has always worked great for the tags that take 1-2 PP. They should not change that, no matter whatever else they do

 

[BigChiefJ]

If that happened, it would probably end our Colorado hunting trips. What we've been doing is coming out every other year and getting a PP in the off years. This has enabled us to draw our tag consistently which means we are able to make plans and schedule vacations from work. Not having that high probability would be a problem. Without the PP system, you could never make plans until after the drawing and that is way too late for many workplaces.

It would change things for folks. I would prefer random because it would make applying with groups simpler and I would also have a slight chance at drawing the best hunts instead of no chance currently. I like knowing I could draw moose every year.

 

[Bluehair]

It would change things for folks. I would prefer random because it would make applying with groups simpler and I would also have a slight chance at drawing the best hunts instead of no chance currently. I like knowing I could draw moose every year.

Points don’t guarantee a moose tag. NR’s with fewer points than I draw every year.

Fact is, the only way to reduce demand is to raise prices. Or kill everything so we have more “burned my points“ threads.

 

[tailchasers]

80/20 sounds great in context but I guarantee the majority of the 15% change will benefit Private land owners and outfitters.

Points should be uses on all purchased tags.
Points should be use on all reissued tags.

Colorado is about the cash so realize all state decisions will revolve around the money.

 

[jims]

As I’ve been saying all along, go to all limited for elk. That way pts are used by everyone that draws a first choice tag. There are a pile of otc elk units in Colo that suddenly would require people to use their pts if they want to hunt.

Just because elk would be all draw doesn’t mean you couldn’t draw often. Take a look at how many deer units can be hunted nearly every year. Quotas could be set in some units to offer more opportunity and some units managed for quality experience with better quality bulls. At least the cpw would be able to manage herd and hunter numbers with all draw units.

 

[Bluehair]

I agree with almost everything said here except for continued OTC units. There should be NO OTC big game hunts.

Also add mandatory harvest reporting to the list. It’s ridiculous that we go thru the HIPS nonsense but ignore deer and elk.

 

[WesternSky]

As I’ve been saying all along, go to all limited for elk. That way pts are used by everyone that draws a first choice tag. There are a pile of otc elk units in Colo that suddenly would require people to use their pts if they want to hunt.

Just because elk would be all draw doesn’t mean you couldn’t draw often. Take a look at how many deer units can be hunted nearly every year. Quotas could be set in some units to offer more opportunity and some units managed for quality experience with better quality bulls. At least the cpw would be able to manage herd and hunter numbers with all draw units.

Don’t know why I haven’t considered this angle before. It makes a lot of sense. Eases some PP demands and reduces the number of people that pick up an OTC as a filler while waiting for a LE.

 

[jims]

To add to my earlier post above, anyone that purchases landowner tags should also be required to use pts. Hunters that purchase these tags can potentially buy tags every year without burning any pts. Many of these tags currently take hunters in the draw many years to draw the same tag. It’s presently a way around using pts to acquire limited tags while still building pts.

 

[HntHrdr]

Hello Goodpeople,
I have been selected to be part of the focus group for the upcoming changes to CO license distribution with the focus on preference points later this month.

I wanted to hear from some of internet hunting buddies on there thoughts on what changes we might recommend to start addressing the every growing point creep and such for both residents and non-residents.

I have my personal thoughts that I will be fine tuning in the coming days as the meeting is later this month.

I am not looking to start an internet fight and feel free to contact me privately if you don't wish to publish your thoughts on the internet.

I do have many dogs in this discussion as I am a victim overcrowding on limited draw areas has destroyed my 40+ year pack trip. I am caught and still being bent over in AZ as a former resident and have bailed on couple of other states. I understand the costs of staying in the point game/bonus game, but cringe when the states change the rules and only give point holders a year or two to get out or change strategies. I have picked several quality leftover tags that would have taken many years or decade or so grab.

Let me know what you feel is important and what recommendations you might have and how we can spend or change or use up more preference points to attempt to provide hunting opportunities.

There are many issues that have brought us up to this point. Lets see what we can do to make it better.

Your thoughts.

Hey Thrill has the meeting happened yet? Thought I heard that a couple of my work buddies sat in on a similar meeting. I would love to get a run down of what you talked about when you are through

 

[Thill]

The meeting is next Tuesday 4/26. I have an email into cpw to trying to get more info. I will keep everyone posted when the info comes out.

There has been some much good insight shared here.

 

[COHunter]

Some 5 year old data
Colorado Elk pop 286,680 Nonresident tags 71,577

Rest of US Elk pop 755,756 Nonresident tags 65,588

 

[buckmster28]

I love Colorado's draw, while I would love more nonresident tags they are probably the most liberal state as far as that is concerned so cant complain there. I hate Nevada's system and don't really like the random states but of course I play them all. Colorado allows us to plan better and they have hunts of all point totals so you can wait or burn them whenever you want. Like mentioned earlier point averaging may be nice and I know it would get rid of some higher point holders but unless you figure out a way to grow more deer the demand will always be higher than supply. We get to hunt deer there in November and can do it fairly often so I just hope it doesn't go away as I think its the best thing going right now.

 

[BrianID]

Phase out the preference point system! I would prefer no points with totally random draw like Idaho or NM.

If there is a point system, then do something similar to Nevada with a squared bonus point system.

I'm not opposed to sharing points to encourage more friends and family applying together but it would cause some point creep on some of the lower demand hunts.

I'm a nonresident and would be hurt by reducing nonresident opportunity but do think the Colorado residents should be given a preference over nonresidents. If you do decrease nonresident % of elk and deer tags to something extreme as 90/10 it will cause crazy point creep for nonresidents. Slowly phasing it in over 3-5 years would help reduce the crazy point creep that would happen to nonresidents. After nonresidents have invested hundreds or even thousand of dollars into building point in Colorado, changing the rules to the game would feel like a bait and switch to many of us.

 

[BrianID]

To add to my earlier post above, anyone that purchases landowner tags should also be required to use pts. Hunters that purchase these tags can potentially buy tags every year without burning any pts. Many of these tags currently take hunters in the draw many years to draw the same tag. It’s presently a way around using pts to acquire limited tags while still building pts.

Also include picking up left over tags will make your points go to zero. Many hunters pick up quality left over tags and get to keep their points. I've never done it but from what I understand in Nevada picking up a leftover tag will make your points go to zero.

 

[AZGuy]

1.Use of preference points for leftovers.
2.Group averaging of points
3.More hybrid options
4.Three year waiting program after you draw a 10+ point tag.

 

[txhunter58]

Phase out the preference point system! I would prefer no points with totally random draw like Idaho or NM.

If there is a point system, then do something similar to Nevada with a squared bonus point system.

I'm not opposed to sharing points to encourage more friends and family applying together but it would cause some point creep on some of the lower demand hunts.

I'm a nonresident and would be hurt by reducing nonresident opportunity but do think the Colorado residents should be given a preference over nonresidents. If you do decrease nonresident % of elk and deer tags to something extreme as 90/10 it will cause crazy point creep for nonresidents. Slowly phasing it in over 3-5 years would help reduce the crazy point creep that would happen to nonresidents. After nonresidents have invested hundreds or even thousand of dollars into building point in Colorado, changing the rules to the game would feel like a bait and switch to many of us.

No way this is getting anywhere close to 90/10. 80/20 won’t even have a shot this go round. Too much lost revenue

There is no question that NRs tags should decrease significantly. No way we should get almost half the elk tags.

Make all elk draw and set the limits that can be set. 65/35 across the board would be a significant cut from current tag sales. Mainly due to OTC NR decreases.

 

[HntHrdr]

I think most residents would be okay with doubling adult license cost if it meant more tags in our pockets. Keep youth tags super cheap, double Res and Double Non Res license cost, trust me the woods won’t be empty come sept and we won’t feel any lost revenue. 80/20 for low point units, 90/10 for 5+points. If you don’t like it you can always move to Co and become a resident

 

[txhunter58]

HntHrdr: you math doesn’t add up

 

[HntHrdr]

I think it will all shake out, but bottom line is less NR tags & more opportunity for Res hunters

 

[Padfoot]

Increase the price of the tags significantly - demand is clearly outsizing supply. The common Joe myth is BS - I have seen the rigs and equipment people are pulling up in on these hunts. If you cannot afford it don't go hunting. If you want the best seats at a sporting event you pay the price. The priority should be more funds for more public lands and better management of the ones we have now. One way to lower point creep is to increase public lands, access, and put more animals on the landscape - it is a long term play.

It would be appreciated if they phase any changes in slowly to give those of us with nearly two decades of applying a chance to get out under the 'old' rules. I am at or nearing the peek of my points accumulation and will be burning them over the next ten years. Once burned I am out and will take whatever random draw tags I get and opportunity 'hunts'. There are states where you would be a fool to start applying in now - Wyoming moose, all OIL and LE hunts in Utah, and Nevada, etc. Wyoming and Colorado are still decent values with reasonable chance of eventually getting a solid tag.

Those of you relatively new to the points game think about this - when I started applying the elk tag I originally wanted to draw in CO took six points 15 years ago and now takes 16 points to draw. Now factor in if they reduce the number of non-resident tags and the ever increasing number of applicants and you can multiply the current points required 3X if you are starting at 0. I may be off a little but I bet not much - if the tag you want takes 10 points today you will need 30 points to draw it if the above happens. Then toss in bad winters, droughts, loss of habitat, increased poaching due to higher populations, more vehicle collisions (more traffic), etc.

I feel like I started just at the end of the 'good ole days' but just in time to build enough points in a reasonable amount of time. Most of my hunts out west have been random draw tags but the odds on those are plummeting too.

Thankful to live somewhere with almost unlimited hunting opportunity and some good ground to do it on.

Hahaha, you forgot to deduct those of us who will pass away with points in used. When the baby boomers filter out it gets easier to draw a tag. Hahahah

 

[JakeH]

I think most residents would be okay with doubling adult license cost if it meant more tags in our pockets. Keep youth tags super cheap, double Res and Double Non Res license cost, trust me the woods won’t be empty come sept and we won’t feel any lost revenue. 80/20 for low point units, 90/10 for 5+points. If you don’t like it you can always move to Co and become a resident

Lmao, I seen a ton of crying over the $7 resident tag increases a couple years ago. Most residents are not like the average monster muleys site guy. You double the tag price and you may have a revolt on your hands.

Also like tx hunter said, even doubling the resident fees won't even come close to making up the lost revenue from your proposal.

 

[SanJuan]

CPW isn't some omnipotent power when it comes to Colorado wildlife. The wildlife in Colorado is held in trust by the residents, not CPW. We shouldn't accept the edict put forth that all proposals must be revenue neutral. Their budget could be reduced significantly and they would still be perfectly capable of managing the states wildlife. Just look at any other western states' budget for proof.

 

[COHunter]

CPW isn't some omnipotent power when it comes to Colorado wildlife. The wildlife in Colorado is held in trust by the residents, not CPW. We shouldn't accept the edict put forth that all proposals must be revenue neutral. Their budget could be reduced significantly and they would still be perfectly capable of managing the states wildlife. Just look at any other western states' budget for proof.

They don't spend the income from tags for big game as it is.

At least CPW was upfront saying they needed more money for Dam repairs, fish hatchery renovation and fish food when they lobbied for the resident fee increase(s) a few years back. Hunters couldn't wait and begged the legislature to be charged more for nothing in return.

Well Landowners got a bigger share of the tag pie so I guess we got something out of the deal

 

[Cohntr62]

I'm a NR and I can't believe how you residents think you have so much more right to hunt than NRs. Here in NW Pennsylvania, we have tons of Ohio hunters and no one argues they shouldn't be here. My sons and I look forward to our Colorado hunts every other year. If they cut the NR % of tags, that will put an end to our hunts. We are barely drawing now. Also, while I know many of you guys are dyed-in-the-wool trophy hunters, I think the tag numbers are ridiculously low in the trophy units. To me, they are wasting the resource and severely limiting opportunity. 20+ PPs to draw is horrible. They could greatly increase tag numbers and still have high quality bucks.

 

[PRCnut]

Some 5 year old data
Colorado Elk pop 286,680 Nonresident tags 71,577

Rest of US Elk pop 755,756 Nonresident tags 65,588

 

[RRCowboyStar]

I'm a NR and I can't believe how you residents think you have so much more right to hunt than NRs. Here in NW Pennsylvania, we have tons of Ohio hunters and no one argues they shouldn't be here. My sons and I look forward to our Colorado hunts every other year. If they cut the NR % of tags, that will put an end to our hunts. We are barely drawing now. Also, while I know many of you guys are dyed-in-the-wool trophy hunters, I think the tag numbers are ridiculously low in the trophy units. To me, they are wasting the resource and severely limiting opportunity. 20+ PPs to draw is horrible. They could greatly increase tag numbers and still have high quality bucks.

Do the Ohio Hunters Take tags away from the Residents?

 

[txhunter58]

CPW isn't some omnipotent power when it comes to Colorado wildlife. The wildlife in Colorado is held in trust by the residents, not CPW. We shouldn't accept the edict put forth that all proposals must be revenue neutral. Their budget could be reduced significantly and they would still be perfectly capable of managing the states wildlife. Just look at any other western states' budget for proof.

I agree with your opinion. However, let replace a few words:

Any government agency isn't some omnipotent power when it comes to what they do/ service they provide. The budget in any state is held in trust by the residents, not The government agency. We shouldn't accept the edict put forth that all proposals must be revenue neutral. Their budget could be reduced significantly and they would still be perfectly capable of managing their agency.

Now show me one instance where that has actually happened. I think the only way you will get that done is by a statewide referendum like the on that got the wolves coming to Colorado. But then a majority of ALL citizens of Colorado have to vote for/ agree to the changes.

 

[HntHrdr]

Lmao, I seen a ton of crying over the $7 resident tag increases a couple years ago. Most residents are not like the average monster muleys site guy. You double the tag price and you may have a revolt on your hands.

Also like tx hunter said, even doubling the resident fees won't even come close to making up the lost revenue from your proposal.

Jake that’s why I said, let’s double NR tags too… I get that some guys b@tch but the my home state is forever changed so much damn money in this state I don’t think that many guys would blink when a deer tag costs about as much a full tank in their truck these days. I don’t think it’s pricing people out.

 

[HntHrdr]

All these non res who want to whine, how about how nothing should change. For a minute I want you to imagine that you get ready for opening day and when you pull up to your lease or private land spot ( midwesterns & southerns) or trailhead (westerns) and there are 10x the amount of trucks there and guess what. None of them are even from your state. Please keep telling me how fine you are with it and how it wouldn’t bother you in the least. Couple that with the insane lack of hunting ethics that I have seen from some Non Res and then imagine that you can’t even hunt deer in your home state every year since a lot of tags are set aside for NR hunters. You would be losing your minds if you couldn’t hunt whitetail every year in TX or Ohio or Kentucky. So don’t lecture Co res when we are tired of being the go to play ground for the entirety of the Rocky Mountain region.

 

[schmalie79]

Hey PRAcnut what’s your issue or point with the muzzle? Or was that just unitended something to clip out/ ignore?

To the original poster… do you have what you were looking for your meeting? Has it happened?

 

[LivingTheDream]

All these non res who want to whine, how about how nothing should change. For a minute I want you to imagine that you get ready for opening day and when you pull up to your lease or private land spot ( midwesterns & southerns) or trailhead (westerns) and there are 10x the amount of trucks there and guess what. None of them are even from your state. Please keep telling me how fine you are with it and how it wouldn’t bother you in the least. Couple that with the insane lack of hunting ethics that I have seen from some Non Res and then imagine that you can’t even hunt deer in your home state every year since a lot of tags are set aside for NR hunters. You would be losing your minds if you couldn’t hunt whitetail every year in TX or Ohio or Kentucky. So don’t lecture Co res when we are tired of being the go to play ground for the entirety of the Rocky Mountain region.

For what it is worth, I would pissed to see that many trucks from my state.

 

[PRCnut]

Hey PRAcnut what’s your issue or point with the muzzle? Or was that just unitended something to clip out/ ignore?

To the original poster… do you have what you were looking for your meeting? Has it happened?

No point with the muzzle loader was just trying to post up the number of elk tags sold since some were asking!

 

[Thill]

Hey PRAcnut what’s your issue or point with the muzzle? Or was that just unitended something to clip out/ ignore?

To the original poster… do you have what you were looking for your meeting? Has it happened?

I do but and want to thank everyone, but I now have some question about the content of the meeting and am trying to get them clarified with the CPW. I will keep everyone posted when I have further clarification. The focus group will be talking about the actual issuance of preference points/weighted points/hybrid points and -----point banking. This is the extent of the scope so far. The meeting is next Tuesday 4/26