CO tag distribution
- Thread starter HighDesertSage
- Start date
LopeHunter
Well-known member
Agree that if a hunter gets a tag for a buck/bull/ram/billy then they lose all points for that species. No matter if draw the tag, buy from landowner, win in a raffle, buy at an auction or get as leftover tag.
Next, if the number of applicants for a deer buck tag is 2x the tags available to be awarded in the draw then if you get a deer tag you are not eligible to get a tag other than in the leftover phase the next year. If 3x then you are out for the next two years. The logic on the 3x example is demand is such will take 3 years for all current applicants to draw a desirable buck deer tag so if you draw this year you sit out for 2 years.
Why lose all points even if you have many more than would be needed to draw the buck or bull tag you got? You are hunting, right? Nobody forced you to apply for that unit, right? You got a tag, you no longer have points. If you prefer to hunt once every decade or so, fine. But it you really, really want to hunt this year it will require you to go to the back of the line if you are drawn.
Next, if the number of applicants for a deer buck tag is 2x the tags available to be awarded in the draw then if you get a deer tag you are not eligible to get a tag other than in the leftover phase the next year. If 3x then you are out for the next two years. The logic on the 3x example is demand is such will take 3 years for all current applicants to draw a desirable buck deer tag so if you draw this year you sit out for 2 years.
Why lose all points even if you have many more than would be needed to draw the buck or bull tag you got? You are hunting, right? Nobody forced you to apply for that unit, right? You got a tag, you no longer have points. If you prefer to hunt once every decade or so, fine. But it you really, really want to hunt this year it will require you to go to the back of the line if you are drawn.
Outdooraddict
Active member
Hunting only on the LO property would make them go crazy.
Charging people all their points is a great idea. Those with money and friends of the LO continue getting their tags- and prevent their PP from entering the draw. If I had the money or the connections- I'd forget the draw all together.
I just need to find a landowner who can't get rid of his/her mule deer LO tag... every year... until I die...
sneakem
Well-known member
Obviously... the grammar gives it away....
I'll give my money to another state that wants it.... First time ever I have not drawn any tags in CO.... a giant 0 for.....and most tags I apply for are slam dunks...
Private interests sucks... that why I quit that working in that industry... its not going to change. Those who have the $$$ make the rules. The public in general are too lazy to make it change for the most part and it takes a real concerted effort by ALL to influence that type of change.
So I guess I'll just sit here and be pis$D and write my letters to unconcerned representatives on behalf of my fellow unconcerned lazy residents...lol:W:
On a serious note though... it does suck...
The way it should be
Some of us saw the tag problem years ago and have been doing just that
Hferrin701
New member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2014
- Messages
- 48
Numbers for you guys. Colorado generated approx. 60 million dollars last year from hunting and fishing. 52 million of that was from non-residents. Considering the debt that this country is in and the problems that that is causing I cant say I blame them.
spook12
New member
Has anyone taken the time to run the numbers on how much money will be generated by ''Force''sales of NR fishing licenses? It should be a pretty nice chunk of change.
Wouldn't that also increase their P-R monies as well?
Where did you get that number from? Thats not whats shown on the annual reports. Of a $198+ million CPW budget ($142 Mil Wildlife side), Nonresident hunting & fishing licenses are approx $42 million. A significant portion, but you are cheating residents out of what they pay. Sounds like a touch of emotions are inflating the number to me. And what does the debt at the federal level have to do with the CPW? The two are unrelated
putm2sleep
New member
Where did you get that number from? Thats not whats shown on the annual reports. Of a $198+ million CPW budget ($142 Mil Wildlife side), Nonresident hunting & fishing licenses are approx $42 million. A significant portion, but you are cheating residents out of what they pay. Sounds like a touch of emotions are inflating the number to me. And what does the debt at the federal level have to do with the CPW? The two are unrelated
Of course that's not what is shown on annual reports. Where did you get the $198M CPW budget from?
noharleyyet
Well-known member
.figures from an article on an unrelated subject.(assuming 2012 data)
http://www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_24593944/call-colorado-hunting-boycott-misses-mark
http://www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_24593944/call-colorado-hunting-boycott-misses-mark
spook12
New member
Supposed too. Forced sales of fishing licenses to NR big game hunters should give R fisherman a louder voice as to money allocations.
Hferrin701
New member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2014
- Messages
- 48
Where did you get that number from? Thats not whats shown on the annual reports. Of a $198+ million CPW budget ($142 Mil Wildlife side), Nonresident hunting & fishing licenses are approx $42 million. A significant portion, but you are cheating residents out of what they pay. Sounds like a touch of emotions are inflating the number to me. And what does the debt at the federal level have to do with the CPW? The two are unrelated
show me a local or state government in this country that isn't in debt up to their ears
JohnCushman
Well-known member
Pisses me off that the state is making that much money and I can't even draw a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice deer tag that take 0 points to draw :hump:
Outdooraddict
Active member
I said the same thing... The response, "apply as first choice." Areas I used to hunt as second choice are now given out to nonresident first choice applicants. So, would you rather get an average tag every year, or wait every few years to get a better one?
Wished there was a different option.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Well since we're discussing Colorado, the state ended 2013 with a $1.1 billion surplus. Off the top of my head IN, TX, WI, FL all had surpluses too, but hey I'm not here to help with your college research paper on economics
http://www.denverpost.com/politics/...y-2014-will-bolster-colorado-budget-lawmakers
Zach
Well-known member
Where did you get that number from? Thats not whats shown on the annual reports. Of a $198+ million CPW budget ($142 Mil Wildlife side), Nonresident hunting & fishing licenses are approx $42 million. A significant portion, but you are cheating residents out of what they pay. Sounds like a touch of emotions are inflating the number to me. And what does the debt at the federal level have to do with the CPW? The two are unrelated
Apprx is now equal to plus/minus 25 million....Give or take...
I just noticed this post.and I thought I would add comments that might raise some awareness (and eyebrows) on how some of the policies have recently passed through the Colo Parks and Wildlife.
I'm not sure if any of you realize it but the CBA (Colo Bowhunters Association) was is support of the proposal for the increase in landowner tags that goes into place in 2015. The CBA was also in support of the controversial point banking in the new 5 year plan. If you think point creep is bad now wait until you see what happens with point banking!
Only a fraction of the total CBA members have responded to their polls and do not offer an accurate representation of all the bowhunters in Colorado, It's obvious that the CBA leaders have their own agendas in mind and are combining their efforts with the Colo Outfitters Association to get things passed through the CPW. You can blame the CBA for helping pass the landowner tag increase and possibly point banking (if it passes). If I was a CBA member I would be complaining about their "polls" and what they are supporting! If the CBA continues the road they are taking I'm sure they will loose support and members! If you are a CBA member make certain to keep up to date on their polls and get others involved with responding! To those that are not CBA members be aware that this is how some of the policies are passing through the CPW. I'm not exactly sure what we can do to prevent this from happening in the future?
I'm not sure if any of you realize it but the CBA (Colo Bowhunters Association) was is support of the proposal for the increase in landowner tags that goes into place in 2015. The CBA was also in support of the controversial point banking in the new 5 year plan. If you think point creep is bad now wait until you see what happens with point banking!
Only a fraction of the total CBA members have responded to their polls and do not offer an accurate representation of all the bowhunters in Colorado, It's obvious that the CBA leaders have their own agendas in mind and are combining their efforts with the Colo Outfitters Association to get things passed through the CPW. You can blame the CBA for helping pass the landowner tag increase and possibly point banking (if it passes). If I was a CBA member I would be complaining about their "polls" and what they are supporting! If the CBA continues the road they are taking I'm sure they will loose support and members! If you are a CBA member make certain to keep up to date on their polls and get others involved with responding! To those that are not CBA members be aware that this is how some of the policies are passing through the CPW. I'm not exactly sure what we can do to prevent this from happening in the future?
