Big Game Season Structure

A5/R5. Over and above the funding that nonres hunters bring to the economy and CPW's budget, we need to support residents who bring money to CPW on many other outdoor activities (year round fishing, hiking, skiing, etc), hunt types (incl upland, waterfowl) and fishing. Reward us who continue to support CPW and the economy year-round and not just one week per year. And, we HAVE to reduce the res/non-res draw splits for all units to 80/20 or 90/10. Note the landowner pool in prime units comes from residents so that in reality the res/non-res splits are almost the same. Do a survey of the front range elk units so see the real figures. Residents deserve more opportunity in good units over non-residents from a fundamental social contribution and financial perspective. If CPW's budgets need to change, better get ready to be active and ready to cut programs now anyway with the predator spiral that we are about to realize.

A Colorado outdoorsman since 1985.

I agree with most of the comments here about reducing non-resident participation to match what other states do. My ideal world is to draw better tags in my own state more often for me and my kids and reduce tags. The only way to do this is to reduce non-res tags if one goal is to reduce overall hunter numbers which not affecting residents. At times, I feel that CPW has "opportunity hunt OTC seasons" with an unlimited number of hunters involved just as a funding mechanism because they know elk success will be in the single digits. Hunting in crowded "non-quality unit OTC non-draw years pumpkin patch of orange" units is neither successful, enjoyable for a hunter with family and is the #1 reason I feel that prevents the recruitment of new hunters which we drastically need. I likewise apply in most other states and am used to this system so I suspect non-residents will accept the same in time. Big issue I am sure CPW will have is reduced funding at the CPW level and the local economy level. While I feel for the local economy needs, I think you have to prepare yourself for this budgetary environment/reduced programs and services anyway with the reality of herd reductions in the face of continued adverse winters, habitat loses with the ever-changing human populations and of course at least the initial onset of wolves on the landscape once they get their foothold ALL at the same time. It will take 10-15 years to teach elk how to avoid these predators (like in NW Wyo) and hopefully herds don't permanently crash like they did in northern Idaho and the Bob Marshall in Montana. Also, I have lived in Colo over 30 years and hunted almost as long and am available to participate at any commission meeting or working group.

I prefer A5/R5. But I do understand there may be units where not enough residents might hunt and you would need to allow more non-residents. Many other western states have limited tag opportunities for non-residents and doing so has pushed a lot of pressure onto Colorado. It is time to take action. I understand this could result in significant revenue loss but I would be willing to pay more for my resident tags if it meant I got to hunt deer and elk each year without so many other hunters. I also don't like that the only time I'm given preference as a resident (65% vs 35%) is during the first choice of the first drawing. After that, non-residents get equal opportunities (for second choice, left over drawings, etc). Thank your for your consideration!

A Colorado hunter since 1992

I would like to see a variation of A5/R5 where all nonresidents apply for unit/season specific tags. The variation would be that all residents get OTC tags that are unit/region specific and capped at a liberal maximum per region. This would help the overcrowding and point creep for nonresidents and also decrease overcrowding due to residents. This would give CPW better control in managing herds and hunter satisfaction in each unit.

Was hoping I would get a survey but since I didn’t I will leave my comments here. First off non-residents should have absolutely no say in this process. It’s not their wildlife its the residents wildlife. I would prefer a draw only system for residents and non residents(A6, R6) it should be 85-15 or 90-10 for resident tags to non-resident tags this would put Colorado in line with almost all western states.
Thanks
A life long Colorado resident

I agree with changing to a2 and r1. Reason is you take away otc you will see more people go to other states that have them and revenue will be lost. The rifle hunting numbers are not high like the archery season. Lessening hunters for archery will allow more cows to get through breeding and help build the herd. By the time rifle starts breeding is over with. And like other residents stated keeping over the counter only for residents means no point in preference points then for residents and also allows less revenue over time

I strongly support A5 & R5.
Many of the NR comments are based solely on their monetary contribution, most resident hunters are more than willing to pay more to ease crowding. Most resident hunters hunt the same gmu year after year, generation after generation. NR hunters tend to flock to whatever unit was featured on social media. One season the unit may be fairly quiet and one youtube video gets posted and you have 30 NR trucks at the trailhead.
Managing NR licenses will solve the over crowding.

All reissue tags should:
1- go 100% to youth
Or
2- require the use of pref points to obtain.
This system allows some people to hunt highly coveted units multiple times without using pref points!!!

I would like to thank this committee for the hard work they are undertaking to update the management plan. I realize there are many tough decisions that need to occur and this requires a balance of many factors that unfortunately have to include economics.

As many others in this group chat have suggested, I strongly advocate to greatly increase fees and limit opportunities for nonresidents as basically every other state has implemented. I do not feel that there should be any over the counter tags for nonresidents. As a resident, I utilize the over the counter tag opportunities to ensure I can hunt elk every year so I would appreciate that this group maintains that access for residents.

I also advocate for a reduction in the nonresident tags to at a maximum of 10% and would even suggest considering a reduction to 5% cap.
I feel it would be more than reasonable to increase nonresident fees to 2-4 fold to maintain the revenues. Let’s set the market and see what nonresidents will pay. I know I have large amounts invested in other states and continue to not draw out of state tags with the worsening point creep.

I am willing to pay a bit more annually as a resident to supplement any losses that occur from limiting nonresident tags.

As we continue to see wildlife experience new challenges with reductions in habitat,
diseases, large winter kill impacts last year, predation with the reintroduction of wolves it just seems like we are going in the wrong direction.

I would also like to thank everyone who is sharing their thoughts and ideas to improve things in our state. Please continue to advocate for conservation and provide balance views as you encounter others to help educate those who do not hunt.

I think that A5 and R5 is the way to go. Make nonresidents draw the tag, and decide which unit they are going to hunt. That way if a portion of the state gets an insane amount of winter kill (like this year) nonresidents don’t go to other parts of the state and pressure the heck out of it they are tied to a unit. Also with draw, CPW you guys could make more money off of charging for an application/preference point to every nonresident that applies, and if you want to add a $20 “processing fee” for everyone that applies as well then that helps to recoupe some costs. I understand managing wildlife takes money so this is a way to make some back. If you just do the cap then you’re only going to make money off of those nonresidents that are successful and able to buy a license instead of making money off of everyone who applies like you would in a draw. OTC for nonresidents needs to be ended. Manage the wildlife and OPPORTUNITY for the residents. Again you guys can make more money off a draw process than a capped process. This is also coming from a current resident that will likely become a nonresident in the very short future. Just my 0.02.

I support A6/R6 as a resident. Management through OTC tags is NOT management. Both animals and hunter numbers need to be managed properly.

Though I do think A5/R5 could be a reasonable compromise

A6/R6

and

PLEASE TAKE PEOPLES PREFRENCE POINTS FOR ANY A-LIST TAG NO MATTER WHEN IT IS DRAWN! CPW NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THE POINT CREEP AND GET PEOPLE USING THEIR POINTS TO GET THEM THROUGH THE SYSTEM.

My vote is for A3 and R1. It is my understanding that most of the non-resident over crowding, as recorded by the cpw, is during archery season. In talking with game wardens in my area rifle crowding has diminished and it seems that there is immense value both for funding for the CPW but to provide folks an opportunity to hunt consistently to provide OTC rifle tags. The ripple effect of having some OTC tags available should not be underestimated with many rural towns being kept afloat by non-resident hunters. There have been many anecdotal stories of ranchers staying in place because of non-resident hunters rather than selling to out of state billionaires and/or developers.

A5,R5 is the way to go. Too many hunters using Colorado as a last resort and no way to manage the hunters. This creates overcrowding and unpredictable conditions year to year. This gives cpw a means to manage these problems.

Resident hunter and did not get a survey. A3 and R3 are my choices.

I strongly agree with the idea of a 90/10 limited draw structure for every big game season and every method of take. OTC units have become absurdly overcrowded and the practice of unlimited OTC areas should be discontinued. Thank you.

A5 & R5!!!!!!!!!

As a lifetime resident I have seen ups and downs in the quality of hunting Colorado. BUT nothing like the last several years!! the over crowding on public lands is overwhelming to the point its not worth the fight. If and when there is a legitimate chance at an elk it's been a true fight over who shot it. The 90/10 split should be implemented and get rid of all OTC tags. As for the private property owners they will still have their clientele. I f any kind of preference is given private owners then they should not be allowed to hunt on public property.

As a nonresident hunter, I too have felt overcrowded, and I prefer limited, draw-only hunts now, even if it means only hunting every 3 years. Colorado is different than other western states because those states don't have the big game populations or access to public land to support more non-resident hunters. I have hunted in those other states, and the experience in Colorado is much better. If managed correctly, Colorado can provide the great hunting experience that residents and non-residents want. Unfortunately, it's time to end OTC hunts. Big game populations have declined because of drought, overgrazing, and disease, not over-hunting. Limiting only non-residents won't resolve those issues. I do agree that residents should have preference when it comes to hunting, and I agree that a 75/25 split would be a fair balance. Thank you for the opportunity to comment!

As a resident Elk hunter on public land in CO it is a test in patience and frustration.
I
Think A/R 5 is the route to go. There should be some type of resident benefit through RFW and other means to get a cow elk for meat in the freezer without all the competition. I saw 500 elk this fall but could not attempt a shot on a single one. Pressure and private land are two things elk understand immensely.

A5 is the answer for archery make the nonresidents draw and same with rifle R5 make them have to draw and if they forget to put in they can’t just come hunt here when they don’t draw other states we get all the hunters that don’t draw their other states it’s getting old! In my spot I maybe see a couple Colorado track a year other then that it’s all out of state people that buy their tags last minute because other plans didn’t work! Time to be about the residents for once!