General Provisions

I think these new regulations, especially concerning the use of vessels, is sorely needed. I have lived in close proximity to Beaver Lake for over 20 years and have witnessed the changes to the lake. Paddle boarding in the summer months has overtaken not only the lake, but the parking spots, the lake banks and the road surrounding it as well. It’s super obnoxious and,
in all honesty, pretty disgusting. Our morning walks consist of picking up trash and beer cans. Last summer there were 2 gigantic pop up tents positioned there for the entire summer! The lake should be, as it always has been, used for fishing, hunting and bird watching. I would gladly give up my paddles to get our pristine fishing lake back!

I’m writing in hopes that the verbiage for the proposed change to the use of hand-propelled vessels being limited to those “actively fishing and/or hunting” be edited to include “and/or those training dogs for hunting.” Being able to use a kayak to condition our dogs for long swims and train in extensive searches for game will reduce the chance of losing/wasting game during our hunting seasons. Having this training tool rescinded would be an immense loss to bird dog owners.

Thank you,

Meredith Park

I concur with use being restricted to primarily hunting and fishing as these properties were purchased from license sales and excise tax funds related to hunting and fishing. There are a plethora of recreational opportunities all across CO for non-consumptive users. Those users want the benefits of state owned wildlife yet are unwilling to pay their fair share to benefit wildlife and habitat. If they were willing to impose excise taxes on recreational gear (mountain bikes, backpacking gear, etc.) then I could see some leniency to the SWA regulations. Until then, there is plenty of USFS and BLM land to recreate on with a host of trails (in complete excess no less with a constant assault on those public lands by trail proposals). Enough is enough for allowing recreation anywhere, everywhere and all the time to all of the public. We are absolutely loving our public lands to death with no concern for future generations.

Hi,
My name is Matt Ekel and I live in New Castle, Colorado. I just wanted to express that self-propelled watercraft are invaluable in the training of hunting dogs for the purpose of placment and recovery of training birds on SWA properties, and eliminating the use of watercraft for that purpose will make the recovery of unfound training birds very. Please allow the use of self propelled watercraft for the purpose of training of hunting dogs.

I support the updated regulations. I support keeping SWAs for hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing as opposed to general recreation.

I am concerned about narrowing the allowable usage of self -propelled watercraft on SWA properties so include only active hunting and fishing activities. Of particular concern to many, this limits the opportunities for training of hunting dogs where specific placement and humane recovery are critical elements to support this activity. In general, I think we want to be mindful of narrowing allowable activities too far on public lands. Enjoyment of wildlife should be a general activity not confined to only specific hunting and fishing activities. There should be a solid rationale and detail regarding the specific problem that CPW is trying to address.
Dave McCormick
Lifetime CO resident

"The definition of a vessel was modified and the use of vessels on state wildlife area waters has been restricted to those being actively used for fishing and/or hunting." This is absurd. Let's say perhaps someone might want to enjoy recreating in a place with live wildlife? Is " wildlife-related recreation" truly going to be limited to catching or killing the wildlife? By law, State Wildlife Areas are intended to be acquired and managed to “provide wildlife-related recreational opportunities to the public.” It does not read, to provide only opportunities for hunters and anglers to recreate. This is a definition being imposed by your agency and not something written into the law – in fact, I would argue it is clearly not within the spirit of what IS written into the law, as providing these “opportunities to the public” is very clear in referencing not just hunters and anglers but all citizens. Perhaps some tax paying Colorado citizens might just want to interact in a way with wildlife where there’s an opportunity to be among the canyon wren singing, the blue heron soaring past, and the trout jumping around them?

What if someone has already purchased the State Access Pass with no intention of fishing or hunting, but because they enjoy recreating in areas protected and managed for wildlife? What happens now? Continually moving the bar with regards to access to the SWAs is confusing for the public and is not consistent with stated management goals for Colorado Parks and Wildlife. This comes across as a haphazard management policy and will be a gigantic equity issue for access to OUR public lands. Populations already underserved by the current access to outdoor spaces will be severely restricted by this definition and now the plan is to spend resources supposedly needed for managing wildlife to enforce these arcane regulations??? Guidelines for the enforcement of these new policies should be included in the proposal, with the budgetary cost to that enforcement, so that the public can truly see where the funding they are providing via taxes, State Access Pass fees, and fishing licenses and hunting permits that is intended to be used for wildlife management is truly going.

Sincerely,
Evan Stafford
Lifetime Colorado Resident
80524

I generally support efforts to manage overuse of state wildlife areas, however I don't agree to limiting use for hunting or fishing. Wildlife viewing should be considered as a valid use of beaver lake.

I visit Beaver Lake in Marble, CO two to three times a month in the summer for fishing and paddleboarding. I do not support the proposed regulations for Beaver Lake. When I am not fishing, I use my paddleboard to visit the east side of Beaver Lake to view birds in the marsh habitat. CPW defines wildlife-related recreation as including hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching; however, the proposed regulations exclude wildlife watching from a vessel as an approved use. This is outside of the definition of wildlife-related recreation and the exclusion of using a vessel in the proposed regulations is arbitrary and capricious. I would support restoration of the specific regulation: "Boating is prohibited, except for float tubes or craft propelled by hand."

As an alternative, I support transferring Beaver Lake to the United States Forest Serve for it to manage with the newly acquired adjacent parcel to Beaver Lake. CPW would then be advised to replace such lands with lands of equal value and equal benefits as those originally acquired. This use of this property does not match the spirit of the SWA concept and should be managed for the greatest benefit of the public.

I do not support the updated prohibitions on dogs in state wildlife areas being only allowed while actively hunting, training for hunting or during Division licensed field trials. This limitation is overly broad and does not address the compatible uses across many SWAs. I support specific prohibitions on dogs in specific areas, but not across all SWA properties. I would support a general rule, "Dogs are allowed but must be kept under control on a physical leash by the
handler at all times except as authorized in #900(C)(15)."

As a psychotherapist, I have a stressful job. Beaver lake has helped me find tranquility because I was able to withdraw myself from my “real world” duties. Beaver lake is the place that I can take a deep breath, relax my body and observe the beautiful nature while floating on a paddleboard. I love how beaver lake is just a short jaunt from Carbondale and I don’t have to go far to escape it all. At work, I preach self-care. Beaver Lake is the place I can go for my own self-care. Practicing good self-care helps us manage stress, lower our risk of illness and increase our energy. If we don’t take the time for good self-care now, we will be forced to take time recovering from illness. It would be a disservice to our community to take Beaver Lake away from the people who really need it, and enjoy it.

I support the proposed changes, particularly for Beaver Lake. As an avid fisherman, I used to enjoy going there frequently, but it is now overrun with paddle boarders, swimmers, and dogs. Good luck catching a fish! No parking, overcrowded, trash everywhere. For those who say this is unfair, it literally says in the purchase agreement when the state acquired the property that the “lake was to be used for fishing purposes only”.

I support the proposed changes, particularly to Basalt Mountain and Beaver Lake. I believe prioritizing the habitat values over recreational access is critical as development and human presence throughout the valley increases. I believe the changes at Beaver Lake get at the original intent of that space as a state holding and may subsequently help mitigate some of the local/visitor conflict that is so frequent during the summers.

I support the changes. The state owns different properties for different uses. Wildlife areas are vital habitat areas for wildlife and open to hunting and fishing. There are many other public land areas that are open for recreation and closed to hunting. I have been to Beaver Lake and experienced the overcrowding. I have also seen similar issues at wildlife areas in Evergreen. On a scouting trip in 2021, a CPW game warden even told me that I should only hunt Bergen Peak SWA very early in the morning and try to pack out before daily busy recreation users arrive - and this was the warden's advice for second rifle season! I chose not to hunt there for safety reasons, but I also suspected there would be fewer deer as a result of all the activity. We need better enforcement of existing rules and any new provisions. There is room enough in CO public lands for wildlife, hunting and recreation - but there are good reasons to isolate and restrict specific areas for mutually exclusive activities.

As an avid paddle boarder and lover of the outdoors, I strongly object to the proposal to make paddle boarding illegal on Beaver lake in Colorado for most of the year. This proposed change seems to prioritize the interests of fishermen over the enjoyment of the lake by other recreational users. It is unfair to restrict the use of the lake by one group of users just because it might interfere with another group's activity.
Furthermore, the fact that there is a shooting range nearby that is allowed to operate during a much larger season affected by this proposed change highlights the inconsistency and lack of logic behind it. If the goal is to reduce interference with fishing, why not also restrict the use of the lake by the shooting range, which could also cause disturbances?
I urge the authorities to reconsider this proposal and find a more equitable solution that takes into account the interests of all users of the lake, not just one group. Paddle boarding is a fun and healthy activity that should not be criminalized without a valid reason.

Beaver Lake, Marble CO I oppose the suggested changes to Beaver Lake. We have been going to Marble and Beaver lake multiple times a year with our friends, dogs etc. we love enjoying the nature, stopping by slow groovin and other establishments. The ban on paddle board, dogs and other community activities is outrageous. I oppose only allowing fishing vessels on the lake and banning dogs. We purchase fishing licenses each year for the sole purpose of paddleboarding on the lake, paddleboarding should be allowed on the lake. Motorized vessels should not be allowed. If there is such an issue permit it, up the fees to help with maintenance. Banning does not help the community or the people in the valley who love to recreate and enjoy the area.

Regarding Basalt SWA; I appreciate that you are concerned about the deer and elk caving seasons, but I have to say, based on the huge number of deer and elk I am seeing in the area in recent years, they are having no problems conceiving or caving. The access to that area is already curtailed for mountain bikers. The closure that exists now (November 1 - April 15) seems to be working just fine for everybody, including hikers, hunters and deer and elk in the "family way".

Additionally, it would seem that allowing a firing range to operate in that area, year round, without restriction, would be enough to dissuade any four legged family from wanting to raise a family there. Mr. Yamashita is quoted in news articles as saying that managing the area next to a shooting range, for the benefit of wildlife, comes down to "predictability". So, the elk and deer set their watches and alarms, in their search for "predictability" so they will know when the area will sound like downtown Beirut in the old days, or downtown Khartoum today? Absurd!

The area seems to be working just fine right now for hikers during the current restricted season, hunters during season, and deer and elk trying to raise their families. Unless someone can prove that the deer and elk herd populations are being negatively impacted, it makes no sense to make changes at this time. Leave well enough alone!

Leave the SWA's as they were intended for wildlife vieiwng hunting and fishing opportunities for those that buy liscene. These should not be used for camping and group gatherings. We have state parks and national parks for those pursuits.

I have read and heartily concur with your proposed SWA changes. I feel the properties should be maintained by and dedicated to wildlife and wildlife-associated uses, not to general recreation or social gatherings, for which there are plenty of opportunities in our state.
I was particularly glad to learn of new item 18; why people are so attracted to fishing from public boat ramps or docks is beyond my imagination.
The changes are carefully-worded and well-thought out, allowing few if any loopholes and exceptions. I congratulate the authors for a difficult job well done.

Leave the SWAs wild for wildlife habitat. Limit and manage camping, general recreation by the public (e.g. biking, hiking, dogs). Manage the wildlife on those properties thru science and use of hunting recreation. Allow use of dogs for hunting. Our wildlife comes 1st, then the people to enjoy the SWAs thru hunting recreation. thanks

I support all the proposed changes. Beaver Lake is being loved to death. The noise, trash, human and dog poop makes it unusable for any activities as far as I am concerned. Wildlife seems to feel the same and there is less and less of it in around the lake. There will have to be strict enforcement to make any prohibitions effective.