12 Jan 2022 CPW Commission Meeting

[COEngineer]

My notes so far:

• CBA (CO Bowhunters Assoc.) does not support removing let-off requirement; feels like they maybe should not have opened this can of worms; Who decided it was worth everyone's time to change it from 80% to 85%?
  • Vote of 5-4 approved removing the let-off requirement completely (so I guess now you can basically have a cross bow?)
• Commission mentioned nearly 100% of 1,000’s of comments were against blaze orange for archers during muzzy season; commissioners advocated for continuing education for all hunters (annually, 1/five-year) - staff will look into options
  • Commission non-voted on the blaze orange (will keep status quo)
• HSUS says CPW doesn’t know how many bears there are in CO and that the increasing number of black bears harvested by hunters and killed by CPW staff (conflict bears) are a sign that the bear population is being hit hard and presumably is being pushed to extinction
  
• Statewide there were more non-res elk archery hunters than residents and in some units it was as high as 70-30 (non-res vs resident hunters). More impetus for making more units draw-only.

 

[Skunk_Sheriff]

It was an interesting morning to listen in. I'm also unclear as to why someone decided to open the can of worms of bow let off but oh well. I will note that it was mentioned that CBA argued this will be a slippery slope of allowing more in a season defined as "primitive". By my understanding the change of having no restriction on let off for compound bows is not going to allow crossbows during the archery season because of other regulations (ie regulation #203(A)(3) which defines what a hand held bow is) which would not allow any device on the bow to hold back the string or guide the arrow rearward. I also noted that the reasoning for removing the let off requirement was an enforcement issue for game wardens. I for one have never had my bow checked for let off as it was.

I'll be interested to see what will come of the muzzleloader/archery overlap debate. Sounds like there will be more discussion when the commission gets to the next 5 year season structure and might be looking to change the seasons around? It will be an interesting discussion for sure.

 

[vanish]

Thanks for the notes! I heard a rumor that 80 and 81 are being moved to draw for archery. Can anyone confirm?

 

[Skunk_Sheriff]

Thanks for the notes! I heard a rumor that 80 and 81 are being moved to draw for archery. Can anyone confirm?

Yes they will now be limited, I believe starting this year. The issue of over crowding was mentioned in regards to this and a stat was brought up that surprised me. In these two units in 2020 the breakdown of archery hunters was 32% resident and 68% nonresident. If you are a resident and hunt these areas looks like you'll have quite a change in the number of nonresidents in the woods.

 

[elkduds]

My notes so far:

• CBA (CO Bowhunters Assoc.) does not support removing let-off requirement; feels like they maybe should not have opened this can of worms; Who decided it was worth everyone's time to change it from 80% to 85%?
  • Vote of 5-4 approved removing the let-off requirement completely (so I guess now you can basically have a cross bow?)
• Commission mentioned nearly 100% of 1,000’s of comments were against blaze orange for archers during muzzy season; commissioners advocated for continuing education for all hunters (annually, 1/five-year) - staff will look into options
  • Commission non-voted on the blaze orange (will keep status quo)
• HSUS says CPW doesn’t know how many bears there are in CO and that the increasing number of black bears harvested by hunters and killed by CPW staff (conflict bears) are a sign that the bear population is being hit hard and presumably is being pushed to extinction
  
• Statewide there were more non-res elk archery hunters than residents and in some units it was as high as 70-30 (non-res vs resident hunters). More impetus for making more units draw-only.

Thanks for posting! And now we have proposed legislation to ban lion and bobcat hunting from state legislators.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Crazy and to think WY and MT residents are whinging about sub 20% allocations.

 

[Stevo74]

Going from 80 to 85% let off on bows is a long ways from a cross bow. Many newer bows are sold with 85% let off, and you have to purchase a separate cam or "mod" on the cam to meet the 80% rule for Colorado.

 

[Skunk_Sheriff]

Going from 80 to 85% let off on bows is a long ways from a cross bow. Many newer bows are sold with 85% let off, and you have to purchase a separate cam or "mod" on the cam to meet the 80% rule for Colorado.

The commission just voted to completely do away with the let off requirement in the meeting rather than change it from the 80%. So theoretically if such a thing exists a compound bow with 100% let off would now be legal. I don't claim to be an engineer or remotely smart that way, but I don't think that is mechanically possible unless you have a crossbow setup, which is still illegal to use in Colorado without a special permit for people with disabilities.

 

[GrantK]

Crazy and to think WY and MT residents are whinging about sub 20% allocations.

Idaho as well, CO sells almost 6X the ID allocation? I admit to laughing a little inside when I'm told about "all the nonresidents" when I'm hunting out of state...

 

[Mudranger1]

So, in theory the OTC hunters shall be pushed to fewer units creating a spectacular time until we go full on draw system

 

[Deleted member 28227]

So, in theory the OTC hunters shall be pushed to fewer units creating a spectacular time until we go full on draw system

I still don't understand why anyone thinks unlimited OTC either-sex elk tags with no reporting system is a good thing.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The commission just voted to completely do away with the let off requirement in the meeting rather than change it from the 80%. So theoretically if such a thing exists a compound bow with 100% let off would now be legal. I don't claim to be an engineer or remotely smart that way, but I don't think that is mechanically possible unless you have a crossbow setup, which is still illegal to use in Colorado without a special permit for people with disabilities.

Just a dumb idea or the downfall of archery? You decide!

I received an email announcement for a new product to be released at ATA this weekend....yikes. Get ready for "pincushioning" deer hashtags.....

www.hunttalk.com

 

[COEngineer]

Jan 13 (meeting continued):

1. CO Wildlife Habitat Program (funded by the habitat stamp you buy with your license and GOCO/Lottery).
   From the program's inception in 2006-2020, invested approximately $171 million!
   • Conservation easements: 253,000 acres
   • Public access: 119,000 acres
   • Fee title: 30,000 acres
   • River bank access along 360 miles of river bank
2. There is a $1M fund to reduce human-bear conflicts that CPW will distribute to communities that submit proposals (educating the public on trash, hazing bears, etc.)

I probably missed a bunch of important stuff, so please feel free to add to the list.

Thanks to Skunk_Sheriff for pointing out that crossbows are still prohibited, regardless of the striking of the let-off rule.

 

[Mudranger1]

I still don't understand why anyone thinks unlimited OTC either-sex elk tags with no reporting system is a good thing.

Not saying it is...but as a resident of this state I would like to see some kind of advantages to residents over NR. And the way point creep has hit the rest of draw units well there is not much to look forward to there. Yes I know there will be opportunities just a little butt hurt over how the state handles things

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Not saying it is...but as a resident of this state I would like to see some kind of advantages to residents over NR. And the way point creep has hit the rest of draw units well there is not much to look forward to there. Yes I know there will be opportunities just a little butt hurt over how the state handles things

Absolutely, that’s kinda my point though. If you take the entire state draw then all units are subject to allocations. The number of hunters in the field decrease and those in the field are a higher percent residents.

As a NR I think it’s ridiculous that NR make up 70% or even 40% of hunters in a unit.

I left the state, why should I get to hunt every year… can’t do that in WY or MT?

 

[Buffs35]

Absolutely, that’s kinda my point though. If you take the entire state draw then all units are subject to allocations. The number of hunters in the field decrease and those in the field are a higher percent residents.

As a NR I think it’s ridiculous that NR make up 70% or even 40% of hunters in a unit.

I left the state, why should I get to hunt every year… can’t do that in WY or MT?

The state legislature doesn't care about Colorado citizens, so you can't expect cpw to give a damn about resident hunters.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

They are too busy trying to end predator hunting than worry about NR crowding.

 

[one ate E grain]

CPW pays salaries with license fees. NR tags pay for salary increases. For now there is no incentive whatsoever for CPW to limit NR, on the contrary there is every incentive to sell as many NR tags as possible. Success rates and hunter satisfaction are also irrelevant.

Legislation to outlaw predator hunting such as bear and cougar might not be successful this time, but it will be eventually. Colorado has more incommon demographically with CA and WI than with our neighboring states to the N.

We also have no statewide organising/lobbying organisation representing the interests of all hunters, trappers (remember them?), and anglers.

 

[Jason73]

Until we go full draw for archery those in the otc units will suffer. And it will get worse as they whittle away at the remaining otc units and switch them to draw. They should have left it alone. Since they've switched the unit I live in to draw, I've seen more hunters!!! Its not a trophy unit just because it's in the draw. I wish they would have clarified this in the regs when it switched.

 

[COEngineer]

CPW pays salaries with license fees. NR tags pay for salary increases. For now there is no incentive whatsoever for CPW to limit NR, on the contrary there is every incentive to sell as many NR tags as possible. Success rates and hunter satisfaction are also irrelevant.

The CPW Commissioners are all volunteers, so I don't think this argument holds water. CPW staff recommends prices, I believe, but their salaries are far from plush (google says avg salary is $49k).