Dinkshooter
Well-known member
Chaos would ensue !
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
OTC has to be drawn as a first choice? or can you put down pref point, then 2nd choice OTC.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Would be interesting to see what would happen. So then you could only get a tag after august off the leftover list, though that could include leftover OTC tags.
Yeah, I would be curious to try that before going limited.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
CO has a much better system staring them in the face. Just look to the north. Set it up just like Wyo. Leave your OTC units as they are for res hunters, a general tag they can buy anytime. For NR's these tags must be drawn and they require the use of points. Same as Wyo Gen tags. Set cap on the total number of Full priced licenses sold to NR's based on past history of license sales and current condition of the elk herd. Wyo uses 7250, CO's would be substantially higher. After LQ units NR allocations are set take that number and subtract it from whatever cap is set. This determines how many Gen tags NR's get. If a gen unit starts to decline, change it to a LQ unit. If a LQ unit herd grows move it to a Gen unit. Adjust the total cap on NR tags if needed. Tinker with your res/NR allocations as you see fit. Your res hunters still get the benefit of the Gen units if they don't draw an LQ unit. Nr's get their slice of the pie. Adjustments are easily made as the results develop and the herd changes.
Wyo has the best system of any State, start there and adjust as needed.
Wyo has the best system of any State, start there and adjust as needed.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,772
If they just made people burn their points for any tag (1st 2nd Leftover ect ect...) I think a lot of the crowding issues would go away.
You want a big game tag for Deer, Elk, Antelope for rifle, archery or muzzle-loader? Fine, get it and you use and loose your points.
Know this, that will reduce the crowding.
I wouldn't do away with the OTC tags. I would just make people think long and hard before they bought one.
If Colorado stopped being peoples backup plan things would be much better.
Having said that, the costs of the licenses would need to be increased to account for the loss of last minute sales.
You want a big game tag for Deer, Elk, Antelope for rifle, archery or muzzle-loader? Fine, get it and you use and loose your points.
Know this, that will reduce the crowding.
I wouldn't do away with the OTC tags. I would just make people think long and hard before they bought one.
If Colorado stopped being peoples backup plan things would be much better.
Having said that, the costs of the licenses would need to be increased to account for the loss of last minute sales.
Last edited:
Pelican
Well-known member
I’m supportive of capping NR OTC tags or even going limited for NRs only. The big risk of going full limited is that we may end up with the 20% LO allocation being expanded to units where it doesn’t currently apply for elk. Thousands of tags would be removed from the public draw. If CPW had ever shown signs of giving a chit about residents, I wouldn’t be as concerned about this occurring.
Pelican has a good point. Going fully limited in any unit means that landowners will get the first crack at 20% of the licenses from each hunt code off the top. I think it would especially impact ML elk given that they are already limited and the public gets 100% now.
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
OTC with caps, for NR’s tag is good for 1 to 3 adjoining GMU’s (such as migration routes). Cannot buy both a PP and an OTC in the same year. Any A tag results in points lost.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Interesting... so to paper that up.
NR currently get about 70,000 elk tags in CO. 37,000 are OTC, 33,000 are Limited.
Residents currently get ~ 27% of limited tags, and 41% of OTC tags.
If CO really wanted to go full WY, you'd have to change the allocation obviously the CO allocation is wildly higher than WY. Going fully WY would mean dropping 22,000 NR hunters.
So ~ dropping all NR tags from NM, UT, and WY.
D
Deleted member 18333
Guest
When I am talking about mimicking Wyo it is in reference to how LQ and Gen units are handled for NR's. It would mean capping the number of total NR hunters and making them apply PP's to either tag choice. CO should use whatever Res/Nr allocation percentages they see fit. Use 84/16 like Wyo, 75/25, 90/10, 50/50, whatever their residents demand. There is also a case to be made that they could adopt a reduced price cow/calf tag program like Wyo to offer a cheaper, more accessible option to NR's and exclude this from the NR cap, just as Wyo does. But ultimately the system is setup to value res hunters first, provide some stability to NR hunters and diverse unit management options for G&F.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I agree I think that aspect of the system works well, and could be followed.
Absolutely! I believe this is what is making the situation bad for both res and non-res hunters. If they don't draw their perceived "trophy" area they just go and hunt OTC and still accrue points.
If someone chooses to hunt OTC they should not be allowed to gain points for that year.
If they had to choose one or the other it would drastically reduce over crowding of OTC areas and reduce the number of applicants for limited quota areas.
COEngineer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2016
- Messages
- 1,526
In a few years, I will have spent my 20 points and then we can switch to this, OK?
Seriously, though, this makes sense and I would forego my OTC archery hunt until I finally burned my points.
No one has complained about the color scheme of the map yet...Ok, here it is: 125-240% !?!!? What kind of range is that?!?!
I would love the preference/random split like WY but I don’t see CO going that route as it’s just too invested in the current draw system(s) and tech and even with the ‘enterprise’ designation, foundational changes for a State agency are like turning a container ship in the Suez (too soon?)
Similar to WY Deer, maybe elk OTC for NR can be issued at “DAU” level (‘Region’ in WY parlanc). Either draw tags or capped OTC ’? That’s an interesting thread to pull.
Two-month long seasons aren’t happening here with the scale (number of hunters), plus the entrenchment of the season structure. I will buy the forum a round if CPW drop ‘choose your weapon‘ and allow folks to hunt 2nd-3rd together in the next decade. And honestly, outside of retirees and people hunting the unit they live in, most people wouldn’t hunt much more than they do now.
Dinkshooter
Well-known member
I’d hunt elk every weekend from Aug to December if they let me!
Qubo
Active member
I’m a CO resident and agree with most of these points. Our system needs change. But as someone whose doesn’t have the money, time off work, or permission from home to hunt outside of my home state I disagree about not gaining points while hunting OTC. At least for for residents. That would mean I’d have to choose between hunting only OTC my whole life or not hunting elk for several years jut to get a quality limited tag. Residents who don’t have the means to hunt out of state shouldn’t have to choose between those two.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Lest we forget Colorado once had 3 day deer seasons.
Would be interesting to see reg books from the 60s-2000s, but I don’t believe CO has ever had long seasons.
Further in the WY comparison, seems like we keep driving past the whole half as many NR tags allocated, 1/7 the total & the Wilderness guide rule. CO has more wilderness and more Wilderness in OTC units than WY does in general units.
In both states a huge portion of the elk are in the Wilderness areas.
IMHO WY is not the best system, CO is the best system.
I would rather be a WY resident, but they have a simple system and it works because they are managing way fewer people and far less opportunity and do a far “better” job of hosing NR.
CO does the best job because it maintains good opportunity for a massive number of people.
Last edited by a moderator:
Muley_Stalker
Well-known member
This doesn't effect me directly because I don't hunt units that are OTC for any season.
If I had to vote i'd vote for doing away with OTC.
If I had to vote i'd vote for doing away with OTC.
