Should CO Full Limited for Elk ?

[Deleted member 28227]

@Oak


That's just insane!

 

[TOGIE]

View attachment 178944
View attachment 178945

yeah no kidding.

wow i didn't know we've already been through DOW and Parks mergers. i thought that was the first time when Hick "forced" it through. perhaps there was a reason they had become separate again after the first merge?

so it was like this: separate --> merged --> separate --> merged (now)?

 

[HighDesertSage]

Only for those who do it. A poll would show you you're a small minority.

My mouth is watering thinking about the backstraps from the calf I shot last year. Thanks for your input, I now have dinner plans.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

wow i didn't know we've already been through DOW and Parks mergers. i thought that was the first time when Hick "forced" it through. perhaps there was a reason they had become separate again after the first merge?

so it was like this: separate --> merged --> separate --> merged (now)?

Might even be more complicated than that, I went to pull some old harvest stats and they are under 7 different version of the agencies name over time.

 

[HighDesertSage]

If Colorado would manage elk like Wyoming, It would be my favorite state to hunt.

If Wyoming would manage mule deer like Colorado, It would be my favorite state to hunt.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Also anyone got a kid at CU and willing to do a little "home work" for me the only place in the state that has the old harvest stats 50s- 90s are CU, Library of congress and apparently Yale?

CU says if you are an active student you can request them to be made into a .pdf

7 Docs total.

 

[Muley_Stalker]

My mouth is watering thinking about the backstraps from the calf I shot last year. Thanks for your input, I now have dinner plans.

Trolling seems to go along with calf killing. It didn't work.

 

[TOGIE]

Also anyone got a kid at CU and willing to do a little "home work" for me the only place in the state that has the old harvest stats 50s- 90s are CU, Library of congress and apparently Yale?

CU says if you are an active student you can request them to be made into a .pdf

7 Docs total.
View attachment 178951

i'm only 30 minutes down the road, if they would let a non student photocopy them i could do it. if they even have non digital versions....

but i do have a friend doing his MBA there

 

[Deleted member 28227]

i'm only 30 minutes down the road, if they would let a non student photocopy them i could do it. if they even have non digital versions....

but i also have a friend doing his MBA there too

My assumption that the first two are "book" the last group the statistics are bound 8x11 printouts. The are non-circulating meaning they are in a box somewhere in the basement. They also have them on microfilm

Pulling them up on worldcat gave me a PTSD flashback to my thesis.

All of this though explains the cut off on stats on CPWs website, they simply haven't had the time to digitize everything.

 

[Oak]

Also anyone got a kid at CU and willing to do a little "home work" for me the only place in the state that has the old harvest stats 50s- 90s are CU, Library of congress and apparently Yale?

CU says if you are an active student you can request them to be made into a .pdf

7 Docs total.
View attachment 178951

Check your email.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Check your email.

Folks see that, well earned.


Thank you!

 

[Oak]

View attachment 178949
@Oak

View attachment 178947
That's just insane!

View attachment 178950

Regarding bighorn sheep and elk, here's an interesting quote from a game manager in 1940 (Wallace):

“In 1922 a herd of seven elk was introduced into the Ouray district. They have increased rapidly, so that now there are probably about 300 head of elk in the district. These animals compete with sheep for forage. It is not likely elk are the limiting factor in the decrease of the mountain sheep at present, though they may have some influence now and may have had more in the past. In any event that it would seem to be a mistake to introduce elk in a region where sheep are doing well. This view should be considered carefully by anyone who wants to introduce elk into Lost Park and Tarryall Mountains at the present time. A number of people have approached me on the subject of transplanting elk into this area...the only place in Colorado where the sheep are doing well. I have not missed any opportunity to throw cold water on all such proposals.”

 

[Deleted member 28227]

So from the info @Oak just gave me + past work.



Holy crap as the state been leaning heavily on NR.




So everyone likes to compare to WY, WY is at 18% NR allocation currently, all, including tags sold as leftovers.


In CO in the 1950s NR got 15% of permits in the draw.

In 58' R tag was $10 and a NR was $50
Today R tag is $56.88 and a NR tag is $688.26.


That differential has exploded.

So CO is giving out waaaaay more tags to NR and making them pay way more for them proportionally.


Oh... and archery is a bit more popular, though shockingly folks did much better with stick bows.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Good old days is when we didn't have units. Just hunt the whole state.

1903? Apparently by 1953 there was a lottery for permits.

 

[Muley_Stalker]

Pretty sure they started in 1957 but my memory isn't the best anymore.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

Only for those who do it. A poll would show you you're a small minority.

I disagree

 

[Oak]

Did you get her aged?

I assume that was for me. Unfortunately, no.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

Would you rather eat a calf or this cow?

View attachment 178492

Did you get her aged?

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

I assume that was for me. Unfortunately, no.

Yep. Bummer!

 

[GrantK]

I'd like to see CO follow the rest of the west and give a bigger preference to residents, all nonresidents having to draw for a general tag like WY seems to be a good system and for god's sake update the ...
units that go 80/20...
I wouldn't be very bothered if I had to pick a unit as a resident, in my experience even the easy to draw limited units have more quality elk than the OTC... going OTC with caps divided into regions would also be a solution to the overcrowding, as much as the issue is blamed on the nonresidents the resident population is growing at a rate that the current system won't be able to handle much longer, it seems like the time to start making changes to fix that issue was about 5 years ago maybe with some luck the CPW will address the problem and not just keep piling everyone who wants to buy an OTC tag on top of each other.... And while we are wishing for things we won't get a random draw without preference points would also be nice ...