More Tags for Landownders?

BeanMan · Oct 24, 2004

LAST EDITED ON Oct-24-04 AT 08:57PM (MST)[p]Colorado:

I just read in The Denver Post that the Wildlife commission is considering giving up to 30% of all drawing tags to private landowners. currently Landowners get up to 15% of all tags. The idea being to compensate them for losses due to grazing etc but game animals.

Before I jump up and down in disgust I'd like to learn and hear your comments.

My Opinion: landowners already get more than enough tags, they don't need or deserve more tags. As mentioned in the article this is just another step towards the privatization of big game hunting, just like Europe.

Read it: columnist Charley Meyers

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%7E110%7E2487993,00.html

BeanMan

BUCKSPY · Oct 24, 2004

What I feel is the B.S. aspect of landowner tags is the fact that they are good for the entire unit, not just the landowner's property. Many, maybe even most, of these tags are used elsewhere in the unit instead of where they where intended.

Skunkterd · Oct 24, 2004

Sounds like a great idea to me!

cohntr6 · Oct 24, 2004

What they need to do is offer more male tags in some of the really hard to draw units (2,10, 201) and on ranching for wildlife properties. I am just talking, for example, 5 buck tags in unit 10 make it 8 or 10 tags. I dont think adding a few more tags will affect the quality.
AS for more landowner tags how about 20% instead of 30%.
Jeff

BeanMan · Oct 25, 2004

Why increase Landowner percentages at all? 15% is pretty high already.

BeanMan

BUCKSPY · Oct 25, 2004

Make the increased percentage of tags valid for the landowners property only and not let it have any impact on public tag numbers.

Bambistew · Oct 25, 2004

I say give em all the doe and cow tags they want! If the excuse for "needing" more tags because the game animals are eating all their grass for their live stock... wouldn't it make sence to lower the population? How does giving out more buck and bull tags have any effect on the population other than the one animal that each tag will take out? I think it's bull!

Boman · Oct 25, 2004

I agree with Buckspy and Bambistew, make em hunt their property only and give em all the female tags they want..RFW for big game is a joke anyways. With all the ranch rules as far as where you can hunt and when and no pre season scouting.. its clearly set up to benefit the landowner and paying clients.

Bazy · Oct 25, 2004

I agree Beanman. I can't see where the landowners need additional tags. The article by Charley Meyers noted that the landowners felt that additional tags were needed because the cost of "providing" forage and winter grounds had escalated. What the landowners aren't saying is that the revenue they receive from landowner tags has risen significantly since 1973 when they got the original concessions passed.

What scares me is that they will circumvent the DOW and probably take this directly to the legislature. We Colorado hunters need to contact our representative and the DOW and register our objections to this "game grab". I believe the landowners should receive tags, however, what is wrong with the existing quota.

Just my thoughts.....
Bazy

graybeard · Oct 25, 2004

I can't download the story and would like to read it, Beanman if you could copy it?? The link doesn't work. I'm surprised to hear them considering this. 15% is plenty and I know the outfitters have been whining about getting 15% for themselves to sell. Maybe this is their way to make more availible to the outfitters. I have a hard time believinng it'll go through. Just my opinion....30% is just way too much.....

Bazy · Oct 25, 2004

Greybeard, Don't under estimate the power of the cattle/ranching lobby. If they bypass the DOW and take this directly to the legislature you can bet they'll get their 30%.

The least organized political group in Colorado is us, the everyday hunter/outdoors consumer. I hope the RMEF, CBA, etc. are reading the papers.

Bazy

txhunter58 · Oct 25, 2004

I agree with everyone that 30% is way too high. Also as stated, I would be ok with incresing doe and cow tags, but I think there are plenty of them to go around already, so there is really no economic incentive for the landowners with those tags, so that probably won't fly. Don't know if it will matter or not, but I think we should all write the DOW and tell them what we think. I did: http://wildlife.state.co.us/askdow/index.asp

txhunter58

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

rocketman · Oct 25, 2004

I read the same article. Have attended almost all
the comm meetings this year and not a single
word was mentioned about this increase. Me and
my hunting buddies have been trying to buy land
owner tags in units 61,66, and 76. Bull tags in 61
go for $2000+ 76 $1600+ and 66 about $800. The
trick is to even find one for sale.Buck tags go
for over $1200 in the Gunnison units and 61.
Open units for elk are a joke. I have no
interest in rags. We hunt 66 and 76 on a regular
basis and I will NEVER hunt an open unit for
elk except for a cow. Land owners getting more than 15%
NO WAY. All the cow tags they want is fine with me.
As usual the sportsman is going to get the shaft
Landowner tags are good in the entire unit.
Make them good ONLY on their property. Fat chance.
Roy in Montrose. Mad as hell as usual about the
way this state is going with our wildlife.

a

ridgetop · Oct 26, 2004

That is the one of the stupidest/worst things for hunting I have ever heard. They really let landowners have these tags to do with what they will, and they are good for public land? If it really effects tag #s on public land, that is screwed up big time. I could see some tags alloted and allowed for on their own land, but that is unbelievably messed up if you could use the tag to hunt public in the same unit. That is a huge transfer of power. Definately a huge step in the wrong direction that would be very hard to reverse.

COHunter · Oct 27, 2004

Yep.....hunters in Colorado are the most unorganized group you can find. The Ranchers will get what they want cause they're organized.

So what if they own land, why should that entitle them to a Tag(s). If the Deer & Elk are eating them out, then buy some crop insurance. The animals are as natural as rain, snow, & drought in the area.

Landowner tags if offered at all IMO should be for antlerless animals only , the tag should have the landowners name on it, and it should be valid only on his property.

Buck tags should be applied for in the general drawing with no special landowner consideration "THATS FAIR"

PeTA, HSUS and other antihunting groups wont end hunting, our own greed for horns will.

Just my Opinion