CPW seeks public feedback on big game hunting license distribution

[TOGIE]

I disagree on this point, I don't see the efficacy or benefit of OTC tags. I apply for everything else in the early spring I'm not sure why we need to pander to folks who don't get there chit together till 2 days before the season.

see oaks proposal above, i think we can have OTC and get rid of the "colorado as a backup problem."

i just see it as a beautiful thing that we can have otc tags and should do it while we can. OTC should come with new caveats though which should eliminate this whole "don't have your chit together issue" we face:

1. they can only be obtained through the primary draw
2. you have an A tag you can't get points that year
3. you can't return your tag

colorado needs to stop being a no consequence state, which i think is exactly your point. but i think we can still have swaths of OTC or General type tags. just not under our current structure.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

see oaks proposal above, i think we can have OTC and get rid of the "colorado as a backup problem."

i just see it as a beautiful thing that we can have otc tags and should do it while we can. OTC should come with new caveats though which should eliminate this whole "don't have your chit together issue" we face:

1. they can only be obtained through the primary draw
2. you have an A tag you can't get points that year
3. you can't return your tag

colorado needs to stop being a no consequence state, which i think is exactly your point. but i think we can still have swaths of OTC or General type tags. just not under our current structure.

Totally agree, I guess for me OTC means buy at any time, rather than a unlimited general tag... but that's just semantics.

I think Oak is spot on as well.

 

[Pelican]

Allocations seem to only go one way, so I'm a bit leery of going too hard in that direction. I think making any hunt code with 5 or more points in the previous season 80/20, and all other hunt codes in the state 65/35 would be a good start.

I disagree. It has been over a decade since there has been serious discussion regarding allocation and it only got this far due to the treat of legislation. If we don’t get a statewide adjustment this time around, we may never get another opportunity. CPW/COA are very effective at putting up road blocks and neither CPW or the Commission seem to give a shit about the opinion of residents on this issue.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I disagree. It has been over a decade since there has been serious discussion regarding allocation and it only got this far due to the treat of legislation. If we don’t get a statewide adjustment this time around, we may never get another opportunity. CPW/COA are very effective at putting up road blocks and neither CPW or the Commission seem to give a shit about the opinion of residents on this issue.

You don't think going from 30/70 in steamboat to 65/35 is enough? That's what I'm talking about, no unlimited NR tags, a capped quota on all units, including OTC.

Right now most hunters are hunting hunt codes that have zero quota, my thought is to actually put one in place and then see what that does to pressure.

 

[Oak]

In FY 17-18 when the Future Generations Act was passed by the legislature, wildlife related revenue was 136 million. The justification for passing the act was that CPW predicted a 30 million dollar deficit by 2025 for the wildlife portion of CPW.
In FY 18-19 wildlife related revenue increased to 157 million. In FY 19-20 it increased to 189 million. In FY 20-21 it increased to 196 million. In four years, wildlife related revenue increased by 44% or 60 million dollars or 2x the predicted deficit by 2025 and yet CPW acts like resident hunters are greedy for wanting an 80:20 allocation or that limiting NR OTC is not financially feasible for the agency.
I think I just lost the last bit of respect that I had for CPW.

Do you have sources for these FY revenue numbers I can use? I'm sure they are accurate, but I like to cite my work.

 

[Pelican]

You don't think going from 30/70 in steamboat to 65/35 is enough? That's what I'm talking about, no unlimited NR tags, a capped quota on all units, including OTC.

Right now most hunters are hunting hunt codes that have zero quota, my thought is to actually put one in place and then see what that does to pressure.

I think we should have a minimum of 80:20 for limited units. I agree that capping OTC or making OTC tags only available in the draw are both great ideas and would support it for both R and NR as this would atleast avoid any future increase in hunter numbers. Capping OTC tag numbers at a number well below the current level would be my preference but is unlikely.
I don’t support going totally limited by unit though as that means a 20% LO allocation which is going to negatively affect both R and NR DYI hunters. Up to ~40,000 tags being pulled from the public pool is not insignificant.
Eliminating OTC and going to a unit specific cap is not going to force CPW to issue fewer tags or increase bull to cow objectives. They currently don’t manage to objects in many HMPs. 37% of deer and 54% of pronghorn DAUs are below the sex ratios and many saw no reduction in permit numbers. Elk DAU 6 (Flat Tops) was at 13 bulls per 100 cows last year and CPW still issued 6330 limited rifle tags. The objective is 22-27. Giving up 10,000s of elk tags to LOs with no mechanism to prevent CPW from continuing to manage crowded, low success elk hunting on public is not a good trade.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I think we should have a minimum of 80:20 for limited units. I agree that capping OTC or making OTC tags only available in the draw are both great ideas and would support it for both R and NR as this would atleast avoid any future increase in hunter numbers. Capping OTC tag numbers at a number well below the current level would be my preference but is unlikely.
I don’t support going totally limited by unit though as that means a 20% LO allocation which is going to negatively affect both R and NR DYI hunters. Up to ~40,000 tags being pulled from the public pool is not insignificant.
Eliminating OTC and going to a unit specific cap is not going to force CPW to issue fewer tags or increase bull to cow objectives. They currently don’t manage to objects in many HMPs. 37% of deer and 54% of pronghorn DAUs are below the sex ratios and many saw no reduction in permit numbers. Elk DAU 6 (Flat Tops) was at 13 bulls per 100 cows last year and CPW still issued 6330 limited rifle tags. The objective is 22-27. Giving up 10,000s of elk tags to LOs with no mechanism to prevent CPW from continuing to manage crowded, low success elk hunting on public is not a good trade.

Solid point, I hadn't considered the LO tag aspect to that.

 

[Oak]

Per Grasshopper earlier in this thread, CPW could partially limit tags in OTC units, and as long as they weren't totally limited they wouldn't be subject to landowner preference quotas. For example, NR allocation could be capped or required to be purchased in the initial draw, but R could remain OTC. Or they could limit archery licenses only, etc.

 

[Pelican]

Do you have sources for these FY revenue numbers I can use? I'm sure they are accurate, but I like to cite my work.

The numbers are from the financial update spreadsheets CPW provides to the commission during the September meeting each year. https://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/CommissionMeetings.aspx

Scroll down to each year, click on the sept meeting, scroll down to PowerPoint, financial update. I couldn’t find the 18 spreadsheet but the previous year is listed in the 19 sheet. If you can’t find one, let me know and I can send you a link when I get home tonight.

 

[Archer86]

Seams like doing away with the unlimited otc in colorado is way over due. And the point problem is easy require any tag drawn to require points and no more returning your tag. Don't make it complicated. They should still be able to make there revenue they need and limit the otc tags. It will make the hunting better in the long run. I don't think they should limit residents though start with nr and see how it works out

 

[Pelican]

And the point problem is easy require any tag drawn to require points and no more returning your tag.

The reason this hasn’t already occurred is because CPW knows that it would result in thousands of crappy tags going unsold. In Colorado, effective solutions to problems are dismissed if they result in any loss of revenue to CPW and why point banking and point averaging are going to be proposed by CPW and probably supported by our commission at the next meeting. At the most recent meeting several commissioners suggested CPW should propose something just to give the appearance to the legislature that the commission is doing something even if they don’t act.

 

[Mallardsx2]

If the tags are that crappy then they shouldn’t be issued in the first place…..

 

[Pelican]

If the tags are that crappy then they shouldn’t be issued in the first place…..

Your ignorance and hostile attitude toward resident hunters should make you an excellent candidate for the CPW commission. You should apply and fix this from the inside! #grateful

 

[Archer86]

The reason this hasn’t already occurred is because CPW knows that it would result in thousands of crappy tags going unsold. In Colorado, effective solutions to problems are dismissed if they result in any loss of revenue to CPW and why point banking and point averaging are going to be proposed by CPW and probably supported by our commission at the next meeting. At the most recent meeting several commissioners suggested CPW should propose something just to give the appearance to the legislature that the commission is doing something even if they don’t act.

Well they could treat it similiar to wyoming go 1st choice uses points and then 2nd choice doesn't and then it goes to a leftover list eventually most will go first choice and still don't allow tags to get returned. They won't have much left over tags but it sounds like the just want to have the appearance that they are doing something then actually getting something done. That's a common trend in these commissions.

I have a double digit nr colorado points I would rather see them go totally random and blow up the points systems. But that will never happen.

 

[Pelican]

Well they could treat it similiar to wyoming go 1st choice uses points and then 2nd choice doesn't and then it goes to a leftover list eventually most will go first choice and still don't allow tags to get returned. They won't have much left over tags but it sounds like the just want to have the appearance that they are doing something then actually getting something done. That's a common trend in these commissions.

I have a double digit nr colorado points I would rather see them go totally random and blow up the points systems. But that will never happen.

I may be misinterpreting your post but currently in CO you only use/loss your points if you draw your first choice. Many of the hunt codes that require double digit points for a NR to draw are already under a 80:20 split.

 

[Archer86]

I may be misinterpreting your post but currently in CO you only use/loss your points if you draw your first choice. Many of the hunt codes that require double digit points for a NR to draw are already under a 80:20 split.

Didn't proof read was meaning 1st and 2nd choices use points and the leftovers dont either way the return tag thing needs to go.

Earlier you mentioned there would be alot of unsold tags if they removed otc and made all those units a draw how would that work?

Could they do a general tag for elk instead of otc that requires a app and to use points to draw eventually that would eat up the points pool as well.

 

[Mallardsx2]

Your ignorance and hostile attitude toward resident hunters should make you an excellent candidate for the CPW commission. You should apply and fix this from the inside! #grateful

You need to learn the definition of ignorance. Lol

 

[Oak]

Looking forward to an update from @elkduds on this topic if he attended the statewide Roundtable meeting today.

 

[jlmatthew]

You need to learn the definition of ignorance. Lol

Just curious, what state do you call home?

 

[elkduds]

Looking forward to an update from @elkduds on this topic if he attended the statewide Roundtable meeting today.

I did, and I will. It was a lovely day @ the Cameo Shooting Universe outside Grand Junction, and I have copious notes to share.