Colorado, Good On Ya!

[Sytes]

Would be great to see Montana follow this direction, pending the cost.

New rule requires Colorado hunting, fishing license to access public lands formerly free

The license requirement goes into effect July 1 and impacts nearly 600 Colorado Parks and Wildlife-managed properties that had previously been free to enter.

amp.coloradoan.com

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission recently adopted a rule requiring visitors 18 years or older to buy a hunting or fishing license to access any State Wildlife Area or State Trust Land leased by Colorado Parks and Wildlife.
The rule affects more than 350 State Wildlife Areas and nearly 240 State Trust Lands managed statewide by CPW. In Larimer County, there are nearly 40 such properties covering 46,176 acres of land and water.

 

[LuketheDog]

Will be interesting to see if they can enforce it well enough, but I'm all for it!

 

[nrpate05]

It's about time!

 

[Bgriffith]

While in theory I love the idea of carving out our own sportsman’s paradise. I can see this souring the General public into advocating for these type of lands in the future. But maybe that’s just me. I know here in Washington we have a “discovery pass” which allows you to enter state parks and state managed lands for a small annual fee. WDFW also has a pass that gets you free access to their lands when you buy a hunting or fishing license. But I do believe the discovery pass does the same thing while not having to buy a fishing or hunting license. Maybe CO’s plan is better... going after the P-R act money? I can just see this going bad for CO sportsman when there isn’t enough support from them for a project in the future and they’ve side lined all other parties that may have had advocated for it because they see it as the agency managing the land for a specific set of people not the public as a whole. My two cents.

 

[LaSportsman]

AZ has a use license for State Trust land. If you are hunting or fishing with a license, that counts. If you are not, including scouting, you are supposed to have the State Trust license. I buy it to support open access but most don't and I don't know if it's enforced. I like the idea accept that it's frustrating if I'm scouting days before a hunt, my hunting license is not valid for legal access.

AZ should count the hunting/fishing license for year round access but then start enforcing the State Trust permit if no license.

 

[ShootsManyBullets]

Oh look! Another fee

I do agree that it's nice to see some other consumptive users contributing some actual $

 

[Zach]

Would be great to see Montana follow this direction, pending the cost.

New rule requires Colorado hunting, fishing license to access public lands formerly free

The license requirement goes into effect July 1 and impacts nearly 600 Colorado Parks and Wildlife-managed properties that had previously been free to enter.

amp.coloradoan.com

This has brought out the ignorance of the general public on how CPW is funded and by whom they are funded. More nature lovers are disturbed about having a "hunting" license than ever. They all want CPW to issue some sort of special permit for SWA's so they don't have to buy the license, just based on principle with no forethought of added administrative cost to implement the idea. I for one was happy to see it happen.

 

[Oak]

Likely unintended consequence (but not bad at all): Last week all the locals found out that the Loma Boat Launch where everyone puts in to float the Colorado River through Ruby Canyon and beyond is actually Loma Boat Launch State Wildlife Area. So everyone in the raft 18 years or older must have a hunting or fishing license.

 

[geetar]

This has brought out the ignorance of the general public on how CPW is funded and by whom they are funded. More nature lovers are disturbed about having a "hunting" license than ever. They all want CPW to issue some sort of special permit for SWA's so they don't have to buy the license, just based on principle with no forethought of added administrative cost to implement the idea. I for one was happy to see it happen.
[/QUOTE
They can’t protest what they are participating in

 

[Shangobango]

Here in Louisiana if you are hunting or fishing a State WMA you have to have your applicable license plus a 15 dollar WMA permit. If you aren’t hunting or fishing you can buy a Wild Louisiana Stamp for 5 or 6 bucks that allows you to access the WMA’s.

I pay my 15 gladly. Money well spent if you ask me.

 

[thusby]

I like it.

 

[bts09]

I do agree that it's nice to see some other consumptive users contributing some actual $

I definitely agree with this sentiment. One would hope that more people will realize that it's the hunters and fishers that have been subsidizing (to some degree) their outdoor enjoyment areas.

 

[thusby]

Cross country skiers and bikers are generally notorious cheapskates. I'm sure they will attempt to raise hell with this.

 

[LaSportsman]

Cross country skiers and bikers are generally notorious cheapskates. I'm sure they will attempt to raise hell with this.

While complaining that hunters are bad for the environment - but there is overlap in those hobbies with hunters.

 

[marksjeep]

Likely unintended consequence (but not bad at all): Last week all the locals found out that the Loma Boat Launch where everyone puts in to float the Colorado River through Ruby Canyon and beyond is actually Loma Boat Launch State Wildlife Area. So everyone in the raft 18 years or older must have a hunting or fishing license.

That's outstanding! I was blissfully ignorant myself, although I'm licensed so its irrelevant.

 

[Pelican]

More backlash over the new requirement. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/...rcing-hikers-to-subsidize-hunters-an-fishers/
I can’t believe the author is employed as a wildlife biologist yet has no clue who pays for wildlife and SWA management in this state. Hopefully the commission doesn’t fold on this issue.

 

[TOGIE]

More backlash over the new requirement. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/...rcing-hikers-to-subsidize-hunters-an-fishers/
I can’t believe the author is employed as a wildlife biologist yet has no clue who pays for wildlife and SWA management in this state. Hopefully the commission doesn’t fold on this issue.

that's an extremely ignorant article (opinion). actually it's just shitty

the hikers and bikers can complain all they want they are subsidizing hunting, what they haven't realized is that hunters have been subsidizing their hiking and biking on these lands, it's beyond infuriating to me

there are some awesome areas purchased with lwcf funding, but as we all know, these properties were largely purchased with hunting and fishing dollar and are maintained with those dollars.

trailhead diplomacy, *deep breath togie*, but man, you want to fight fire with fire so bad

it seems to me i've learned that cpw cannot, unfortunately, just provide a stamp (like they used to) or some sort of simple entry fee for these lands, it unfortunately has to be a license for hunting or fishing, otherwise due to some worknig of laws (federal I think?) they cannot keep the money for cpw specifically.

 

[Ajax2744]

This is a great reminder on how ignorant most Americans are to how wildlife and public lands are funded in America.

In CO SWA's have always been funded and strictly maintained for hunting and angling opportunities. The fact that hikers and bikers think that just because the state maintains these lands that they are open to all.

I love the fact that they require a fishing or hunting license because
1.) It makes sure people using these areas are at least contributing to the funding
2.) Increases the amount of license sales which I believe should help increase Pittman/Robertson and Dingell/Johnson dollars that CO will be allocated. Which in turn means more funding for conservation in CO.

This all seems like a win/win to me. Hikers and bikers think that because they are not consumptive users that they aren't affecting the landscape, but the 24/7/365 constant use of Colorado's trails and general outdoors has a huge effect that those same people complaining just plainly don't realize.

 

[Oak]

CPW is now being sued over the hunting or fishing license requirement to enter State Wildlife Areas.

 

[Irrelevant]

CPW is now being sued over the hunting or fishing license requirement to enter State Wildlife Areas.

It's frustrating that some of those groups don't seem willing to recognize they've been getting a free ride for a long time. Even if they opposed the need to buy a hunting/fishing license, they could at least include general funding in their list of demands.