Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping System

Colorado Filming Permit Denied

Oh, and I have been told by Utah guys, that the same rule applies for CWMUs, the same concept as RFW in CO. I never looked deep enough into the Utah system to verify, but would not be surprised, given who is the promoter of such ideas in Utah.
That is absolutely the case in Utah, public lands are included in CWMUs and IME there was no consultation with the BLM office in doing so. The state has the authority to set hunt unit boundaries, which a CWMU is by definition, as they see fit. When I brought this up with some of the folks there, they compare it to the setting up of limited entry or once in a lifetime hunt unit boundaries. However, like CO, non-residents cannot draw CWMU permits for bucks/bulls, but can for antlerless. Don't know about COs system, but in Utah a CWMU is set up by species. So a CWMU may be set up for deer, but not pronghorn. If that is the case it is legal, if access is possible, to hunt pronghorn but not deer on public lands in that CWMU.

To be truely fair, the one CWMU I am most familar with on this issue included 16K acres of BLM that is checkerboarded from the original railroad grant. Most of the BLM sections in this CWMU do not have legal access as corner hopping is, IIRC, illegal in Utah.
 
In Colorado, when it comes to big game hunting, the needs and wants of Landowners trumps everything.

Landowners in Colorado are more than likely going to get more sellable vouchers good for tags on public land next year too, but all you hear is crickets in the hunting community
But all hell breaks out if Arizona mentions giving "One" more tag to some group

I just dont get it :mad:
 
In Colorado, when it comes to big game hunting, the needs and wants of Landowners trumps everything.

Landowners in Colorado are more than likely going to get more sellable vouchers good for tags on public land next year too, but all you hear is crickets in the hunting community
But all hell breaks out if Arizona mentions giving "One" more tag to some group

I just dont get it :mad:

You need better organizers.
 
Landowners in Colorado are more than likely going to get more sellable vouchers good for tags on public land next year too, but all you hear is crickets in the hunting community
But all hell breaks out if Arizona mentions giving "One" more tag to some group

I just dont get it :mad:

JL - I am with you. This issue is important when considering the principle of giving public hunting resources to private groups, but in terms of the impact it has on opportunity and bigger issues, I think you are right that Colorado hunters face way bigger issues, landowner voucher proliferation being one of them.

I suspect the thread is intriguing to hunters in other states, such as my home state of Montana, where RFW and CWMU operations are being promoted by some legislators as the "cure all" for what minor ailments we have. Same with WY, ID, and AZ, where these type of ideas seem to come up so often. For hunters in those states, it is a "head shaker" to read that a state trustee resource such as wildlife, can be handed off to private enterprises so easily. Maybe the impact is small, but the principle being violated is the principle we fight so hard to preserve - Public Rights in Wildlife.

Items like this tend to get a lot of attention. It should get some attention.

From the practical standpoint, I hope the bigger issues you guys are facing, such as landowner voucher proliferations, legislative attempts to gain state control of Federal lands, the fact that you guys are not allowed to hunt State Trust Lands in the open manner found in other states, get the attention they deserve.

I hope this thread does not distract from the importance of those other issues you Colorado guys are facing. Good luck.
 
RFW vs BLM

Since several of us belong to the Muledeer Foundation and the RMEF would it make sense to encourage them to take up this issue of the RFW taking over BLM ground for the purpose of their clients??? Thanks Fin for bringing this up to our attention, had you not made this known I am sure there are hunters that would check the boundaries of the ranch and hunt the BLM ground surrounding the ranch not knowing that they would be trespassing on public land. What a crock. I wonder how many other ranches are not aware of this scam.
 
Parks and Wildlife Commission meeting

The Parks and Wildlife Commission will hold meetings on Thursday and Friday, September 6th and 7th in Glenwood Springs if anyone is interested in bringing up this issue with the commission. The complete agenda for the two days can be found on the on the DOW webpage. By the way, what does the red thumbs down mean on this thread???
 
The odds of some guy from MT getting the CO Commission to change that rule, is pretty slim.

Try to find out if there is a financial/gratus connection (campaign contributions, complimentary hunts, etc) between the ranch owners and the commission members. I'm betting there is...
 
This is rediculous! I love how these different states are taking away all these opportunities. And film permits! WTF is their deal? Why should you have to pay to film on public lands! Do photographers have to pay to take a photo on public land that they sell? Well filming is usually 24 photographs per second sometimes 30 photographs per second put together, so WTF is the difference between filming and taking pictures!!!
 
WTH indeed!
What public land is enrolled in this program, and is it well publicized? Is it primarily public land surrounded by private with no access other than a chopper? If not, how is somebody supposed to know? I could see myself buying an OTC tag and heading out onto this land without even knowing I was doing something "wrong"!
 
That is a bunch of BS. How on earth can they get away with it? Oh, wait, I get it, money talks. Selling out our public lands is what it sounds like to me. I was thinking about hunting Colorado next year. Not now. I wouldnt' give a dime to Colorado now.
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Forum statistics

Threads
113,577
Messages
2,025,605
Members
36,237
Latest member
SCOOTER848
Back
Top