Big Game Season Structure

Colorado resident who hunts archery and rifle seasons. I would prefer our state to focus on the quality of hunts for residents like the rest of the western states. My preferred alternatives would be A5 and R5. With an increase in non-resident fees to account for loss of revenue. CO is already the cheapest, easiest to get elk hunt in the US. Quit giving up our citizenship privileges to those that don't live here.

No question that there is a huge problem in this state with overcrowding especially in OTC units and an equally alarming issue with point creep. There is virtually zero chance for a new hunter (even a resident) to ever reach some of the more desirable units in the state. Preference point systems just don’t work without offering at least a small percentage of the tags in a random lottery to keep people engaged.

With that being said I support A5 and R5. As for residents, we HAVE TO STOP letting people collect a preference point AND also have an OTC tag. We should get one or the other.

Colorado resident hunter here. With family and friends sprinkled throughout the Rocky Mountain west. I strongly support A5 and R5. Colorado’s population has doubled since I was born. With that we have a large influx of resident hunters who need to be taken care of first! When I hunt out of state it’s once every 4-10 years. And honestly those hunts are far superior to Co these days since it isn’t a free for all! Let’s make Co hunting the 1. In the west again but it should be great for residents before it is great for the rest of the country!

I am a Colorado resident hunter and favor R5 and A5. There is no other western state that offers OTC elk licenses. My only chance to hunt out of Colorado is to build points and hunt infrequently. However, anyone in the world can come to Colorado and purchase a OTC elk license. And this is very obvious when I go hunting. Often, the NR cars outnumber the R cars 4 to 1 (and probably some of the CO plates are rental cars for NR hunters). It is crazy and unfair to residents. The percentage of NR hunters should only be 10-15% like in other western states. I am willing to pay more for tags if money is the deciding point. And I see no reason NR shouldn't pay more.

I am a Colorado hunter and resident of 23 years. My vote would be for A5 and R5. The number of tags overall needs to be reduced to let the Elk and Deer resources recover. I realize that the NR tags generate a lot of revenue, but the quality of hunting in Colorado has declined significantly due to over crowding and over hunting. I would prefer to pay more as a resident for a better quality of hunt. I think Wyoming has a good model with the General tag where residents get it with no caps, however they have one tenth of the human population of Colorado. The bottom line is that somehow the overall number of tags needs to be significantly reduced. Thanks.

I'm a multi-gen Colorado native and have been hunting here my entire life. I've hunted most of the Western states. Some many times. I continue to travel out of state to hunt every year, and will continue to do so until I can no longer obtain tags. I have zero hard feelings towards non-residents and blame them for nothing more than trying to experience what it is I too love so dearly.

However, I am in support of options A5 and R5. The only reason I'm in support of reducing NR tags so significantly is because every other Western state already has. The resident hunting experience in Colorado is no longer a quality one. There are no other states for NR's to go and get a guaranteed elk tag anymore but ours. This really is a problem for residents. Colorado is everyone's backup if they don't draw a tag elsewhere. It's unfortunate we have to follow suit, as the rest of the West has led us to a point we must align ourselves similarly with their NR policies, or suffer as hunters without a true in-state hunting experience of our own.

As a resident I would agree with either A4 or A5, and R4 or R5.

Allow residents to maintain a true OTC opportunity and restrict non residents to an OTC with caps that are unit specific. For non resident tag numbers, decrease slightly, but spread evenly throughout the hunting areas. This allows residents the opportunity to hunt frequently, to reduce hunter crowding, continue non resident OTC that still provides tag opportunity, and maintains funding through tag prices. To reduce crowding more but still achieve current funding, reduce non resident tags by 15 percent, but increase tag fees by the same percentage. This reduces crowding further and still allows for adequate funding.

Ultimately, I am most concerned about what is best for our wildlife. I do think that OTC licenses should be available for residents, so long as it is not a detriment to the animals. Limiting licenses for out of state hunters sounds like the best option for all seasons. Thank you for all that y'all do for our wildlife and our state.

A5 & R5. As a lifelong resident I’ve seen the quality of hunting decrease dramatically in the last 40 years with more pressure & more crowding every year. I would suggest that Colorado set a non-resident quota at 15-20% like neighboring states. I understand that Colorado is an opportunity state for many but in order to protect herds for the long-term we have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

I am a Colorado resident for over 30 years and have hunted every year.
There have been many changes over the years and number of hunters is the worst I have ever seen it.
The last 5 year season structure having the seasons a week later has been very destructive to the mature Bucks and Bulls. Bucks have been more vulnerable in multiple seasons rather than just the 4th season when everyone wanted to draw that tag when they were rutting.
With the mature bulls the later we hunt them with heavy snow and colder temps there much more vulnerable. That being said I would go back a week with all seasons.
As far as all the OTC tags go, residents should for sure have a priority in the state they live in. This is the way it is in every state except Colorado! Non resident tags in many units in Colorado for deer are easier to get than a resident tag. Minimum 80% resident and 20% non resident tag allocations and non residents should have to draw for all tags. Everyone that wants to hunt out west puts in for multiple states to hunt and when they do not draw ,Colorado is always there backup state. We need to stop that a the flood of non resident hunters in this state. Thanks

What difficult choices. What does the Commission hope to do? What has the most need?

Been hunting Archery for 5 years as a Resident and the same amount of time for Rifle. I am quite clear on one thing: Options A1 (Status quo) is not sustainable and will continue to prioritize non resident hunters over resident hunters. A2 (statewide cap) doesn't provide enough flexibility to address the core issue. I've hunted several units OTC and there's been crowding in all of them. We've become the Elk Hunting destination state for way too many hunters and the problem is not going to get better as more time passes and additional hunters enter the pool.

There's a reason that literally no other state has such relaxed OTC rules. That said, I am a fan of options A3 - A6 and would be in favor of any of them. Flexibility to cap at the GMU level still provides flexibility in how aggressively we limit. Bottom line for me is the north star should be which solution improves resident hunting experience WHILE ALSO prioritizing doing the right thing for herd management?

It's not lost on me that these options will impact revenue for CPW. So I wonder, what does that potential loss in revenue actually translate to in terms of real impacts? What options exist for bridging the gap elsewhere? In any case, the revenue impact should not matter in the face of doing what's right for a healthy Elk herd that provides quality hunting opportunity for Residents first and non residents second.

I am a long time resident of Colorado an I support A5 and R5 and would be glad to pay more for a resident license to close the loss of revenue gap. I no longer hunt OTC units for any season because of the pressure and crowding from non-resident hunters.

As a non-resident who applies for a muzzleloader either sex elk and a buck mule deer tag and ensures that I draw the tag every three years by buying preference points in the off years, I feel that the opportunity for residents vs. non-residents should be equal. Taxes paid by residents of Colorado aren't what truly supports the CPW, it's preference point and license sales. Residents don't contribute any more than I do to the cause of managing the wildlife resources of Colorado. Living in the northeast, I have no more opportunity or privelege than any out of state hunter who comes in and buys a non-resident license and tags. We should all equally share the resources and together enjoy the opportunity to hunt and harvest game and fish across this great nation regardless of where we call home.

As a resident CO hunter for many years and seeing the increased pressure and point creep I have a few thoughts broken down by category.

Nonresidents
- No OTC or leftover tags for NR
- Align NR tag allocation for all species with other Western states (capped at ~15%), I believe that CO is > 30% with OTC tags, secondary draw, etc. Wyoming just lowered their NR tag allocation to 10% and had a hefty price increase to their NR elk, antelope, and deer tags.

I would be in favor of A5 and R5. We are the only Western State that gives almost 50% of our tags to nonresidents in some units. I also feel surveys for residents and non residents should be mandatory to get a better handle on hunting pressure. The over crowding is real in many of the Western Units. I don’t even waste my time anymore hunting OTC units as a resident due to too many people (most non residents). I understand the revenue obstacles this would create but the wildlife needs to be managed for herd health and safety concerns not money. I would also be in favor of doubling resident license costs in order to help with lost revenues of limiting non residents. We are dealing with a resource that is NOT infinite and it should be managed as such.

Capping or eliminating Non-Resident OTC is needed to work towards restoring the quality of big game hunting experience on OTC. Status quo is the worst option. Every other state in the west has moved to limit non-resident numbers in some way and most of them have maintained options for residents to be able to hunt every year if they choose. This has shifted even more NR pressure onto Colorado and decreased the quality of the average OTC hunt. Caps and limits on non-resident participation can be adjusted to restore and then maintain average quality of hunting experience for all. Please prioritize residents and increase hunt experience quality for all.

As a resident...
limit them all -A6, R6.

Move to dau or gmu specific r/nr allocations.

Add a Wyoming style random draw allocation so you always have a chance.

Add a "draw or lose them" point cap.

Give preference to residents, or first pass at leftovers.

Resident OTC archery tags are one of the few ways mentor hunters can be involved with new hunters over the age of 18. Planning vacation time for actual hunting, along with weekend scouting, and regular archery practice, requires a considerable time commitment from every archery hunter.

The uncertainty of not knowing whether you may draw a tag until almost half way through the year will discourage resident hunters of all ages. Many of our lowest income hunters are also the same employees with the lowest work tenure. Often these employees have little control in selecting their earned vacation days. Most senior employees get first choice under most employment circumstances. The longer archery season, with an OTC option for residents, affords these new and experienced archery hunters the best opportunity to plan their limited vacation time around deer and elk hunting seasons. Success rates are low but the actual enjoyment of participating in this fall tradition is truly priceless. Archery resident OTC licenses should remain available to help retain experienced hunters while offering the lowest barrier possible for new, Colorado resident hunters to begin their love of Colorado's outdoors.