CO tags changes

[WItoTX]

Unfortunately that's not correct. Co issues no refunds unless you turn a tag back in.

You have to buy a non resident hunting license to buy a point. $90 Nr license + $10 habitat fee.

Then $10 per species. Non refundable.

Then if you draw you pay for the tag.. Elk bull $700+

$110 x 20 years = $2,200 (with no tags purchased yet.) It's a scam lol Lets milk these hard working people for 20 years then cut the tag numbers by 10-15%

That's right, I was thinking NM because I just applied there. LOL.

Regardless, $110 buck a year isn't saving Colorado Parks and Wildlife. They make all their money on tags they sell. And if they sell more NR tags, they make even more money. Not only that, but they will see less hunters in the woods because NR's typically don't hunt the entire season. Which would increase the elk herd.

I personally don't believe the point system is the best system. I think a NM system is better (still not ideal), and if implemented across the west, would severely limit people like me, who apply across just about every western state, every year. If I had to front the cost of the entire tag, wait a month, then get a refund, I would apply a lot less places.

But it's just my opinion.

[CrownKiller14]

Agreed they make most of the money off the nr tags, but $110x 138722 =$15,259,420

(138,722 is the number of NR app in 2022 for elk only) not included otc or other species hunters that didn't apply for elk. Of that 29% drew tags

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2022ElkDrawRecap.pdf

I don't know the answer other than going to a system like WY. Draw and lotto combined, reward the point holders while giving the first year applicants a chance. Driving incentive to apply and rewarding point holders, but then you also have less tag for point holders causing point creep. It's an endless circle of positive vs negative.

[WItoTX]

Agreed they make most of the money off the nr tags, but $110x 138722 =$15,259,420

(138,722 is the number of NR app in 2022 for elk only) not included otc or other species hunters that didn't apply for elk. Of that 29% drew tags

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2022ElkDrawRecap.pdf

I don't know the answer other than going to a system like WY. Draw and lotto combined, reward the point holders while giving the first year applicants a chance. Driving incentive to apply and rewarding point holders, but then you also have less tag for point holders causing point creep. It's an endless circle of positive vs negative.

And this doesn't include their second draw fee. I agree, I don't know what the fix is. I do know removing the spring bear hunt is a bad idea, wolves are a bad idea, and allowing the public to vote on these issues instead of listening to biologists is going to be a serious issue in 10 years. Especially with wolves.

[jnd1959]

In Co, it really doesn't matter if you buy a point or enter the draw since the draw is 100% preference point. You'd just put in for unit 2 and since you don't have to front the cost of a license it ends up the same. I'll have six points going into the 23 draw. Almost no mans land. No biggie though, there's a couple 5 point units out there or I may just go with a 3 point unit and choose a guided Backcountry hunt. If you look at the time it will take to get a top unit in any state that has preference points, unless you are in your 20s or are within 5 of max points your likely to run out of age before your number is drawn. My view is plan to go to a 3 point unit every 5 years and alternate Az, Wy, Mt and Nm on other years. That way your hunting every year somewhere.

As far as the proposed changes, I assume this is for the new 5 year plan. Hopefully that's 25 since I plan to burn points in 24.

[jbw899]

Thanks for sending this. I just submitted comments. Seems like every state is targeting nonresidents. Between that and point creep/bad odds out of state hunting is getting more and more difficult.

[WItoTX]

The nice thing with CO is the OTC, which I hope never changes. We found a honey hole, but it requires serious effort to get back to it. Hunt there every year, never see another hunter or guide.

[CrownKiller14]

Don't brag to much or your inbox will be full of "hunting partners"

Well hopefully you submitted a comment..

Limiting tags in HD units is going to push guys into regular units. Regular units are now full so more guys go otc. Then otc becomes draw due to hunter numbers, and even if its not your unit maybe someone else otc unit becomes draw now they're in your unit and finding your honey hole. LOL

[Dirty Kev]

Thanks for sharing this. I sent in my survey and left a comments on the board.

[bowhuntingw]

In another 10-15 years hunting out west will be 2 things, 1, a rich man’s sport because of tag/hunt costs and 2, a opportunity you get 3-4 times in a life time because of all the point creep/systems that are mostly terrible. Wyoming, one of my favorite states, has one of the worst systems.

[BTLowry]

Should take the public land that belongs to the state and give that percent to residents.

Federal land percentage gets the rest and that goes to any US resident.

That would solve things

[bossbowman]

Implementing more and more extreme non-resident draw quotas just increases poaching, they've been doing case studies on it.

[Kirby86]

Guess I better keep on driving past CO til I get to Idaho!

[wytex]

Man some of you will never learn, the state gets to manage it's wildlife, the feds manage some of the land.

OTC is getting some looks too for change.

[bigchiefj]

I would love the point averaging and point banking.

[donpablo]

So there are some units where a resident can draw with 3 points and if they pick it as their 2nd choice, they draw it (assuming they don't draw their 1st choice) and don't lose their points. They put in for the most exclusive units so that they can draw out every year and don't have to resort to the OTC units.

This doesn't work for Non-residents. Would this mean that only a percentage of residents would get away with this?