Colorado BHA Position on res/nonres tags - missing the big picture

LostArra

WKR
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
3,435
Location
Oklahoma
It's kind of funny though........Colorado has UNLIMITED OTC tags for non-residents. A million NR's could show up and hunt every year if they wanted. It's hard to increase those NR hunting opportunities........they're already unlimited.

It seems that any discussion about states limiting elk hunting opportunities for non residents should not include Colorado.

No preference points, no early application, no draw, no hand wringing over point creep just load the truck next fall, buy an OTC archery tag and chase elk for a month. Try that in any other elk state (maybe Idaho?).






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,516
Location
SW Colorado
TXCO where was your post when New Mexico took their non-resident, non-guided allocation down and strip you to access of all that public land? Seriously Colorado is more than generous with their NR allocation especially being one of the last states where Joe Blow from Texas can drive up the day before season buy a bull elk tag and hunt. I don't see anybody complaining about other states with lower NR allocations.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
15,528
Location
Colorado Springs
I
So basically from your standpoint there's zero reason for anyone who's a non-resident hunter to support an organization such as BHA(which btw has "hunters" in the name for land access and rights). I get your reasoning regarding state owned animals but if you want people outside of your state to also fight for your rights as hunters and access to federal public land isn't it in your best interest to profit from non-resident hunters such as myself. If you don't need our money fine but don't expect us to fight along side you to keep OUR public lands public for hunting. And yes I am a BHA member.

You can support whomever you want. But again, you're trying to combine two issues together "public lands for hunting" and "tag allocation in Colorado". These are two totally separate and different issues.

That's like me screaming that there aren't enough NR tags in PA, so I'm not going to help you fight for public land.
 

Stwrt9

WKR
Joined
Sep 16, 2015
Messages
565
Location
PA
You can support whomever you want. But again, you're trying to combine two issues together "public lands for hunting" and "tag allocation in Colorado". These are two totally separate and different issues.

That's like me screaming that there aren't enough NR tags in PA, so I'm not going to help you fight for public land.

there is no limit on NR (Deer,Turkey, bear)tags in PA but that's besides the point and has no bearing on this topic. BTW you have just as good of a chance to get an elk license in PA as a NR than as a Resident it's based on a point system but it doesn't differentiate NR or Residents.

to say they are 2 different topics is a little dicey as they are both directly relate-able and have some cause and effect as things go forward. My problem is with the BHA advocating for fewer NR Tags yet they want NR's to help fight public access/transfer for hunting. Bottom line is it serves CO and other western states to offer these NR tags as they bring in big $$$ and that allows you to hunt elk for $49 instead of a great deal more.

I think the bigger issue you should be thinking about, is if there are fewer NR's tags that means fewer NR hunters which leads to fewer Money for conservation which also leads to Fewer NR caring about the needs for public lands out west for hunting purposes. Which inturn effects us all as hunters negatively. Last thing any of us hunters wants is OUR public land being sold of or restricted due to the states becoming more and more in debt.
 
Last edited:

Bulldawg

WKR
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
928
Location
Minnesota
Things I've gathered from this thread.
1 it doesn't matter that half the units in Colorado is OTC, but unlimited tags is not enough we need more!!!!'nn
2 OTC hunts should only be otc for nonres, residents don't deserve that right.
3 A kid in Texas who's going to go hunting deserves a better chance at getting a tag in Colorado than a kid growing up in Colorado

The way I see it, hunting in Colorado as a non resident is a privilege not a right, giving more opportunity to someone as a nonres is taking away opportunity from a resident, residents should ALWAYS be given more, it is their state. It's like if I invited you over to my house for dinner and we watched tv, you really like my tv it's big, now you deserve to take my tv?????

In all honesty ZERO opportunity is taken away from non residents, you have UNLIMITED opportunities to hunt Colorado EVERY SINGLE YEAR!! And one day that will change, someday hopefully things will be more in line with other states and more units will be limited or the OTC tag will be like Wyoming's general tag.


TXCO you want to take take take, but give very little, before trying to change how Colorado manages their game animals, why don't you work on ways to provide more public hunting access in the state of Texas. If I could come to Texas, buy a tag and hunt public land for deer, pigs, turkey, etc. have have as much land as I do in Colorado, AND I didn't have to draw that tag in Texas, then I will get more on board with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,516
Location
SW Colorado
Nice post bulldawg. I also love the fact that a guy who resides in a state that is almost entirely private land wants to complain about Colorado taking away his access to millions of acres of public land because they want to lower the NR quota to align with more of the western states. Last time I checked you didn't need a hunting license to hike the wilderness or blm or forest service.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
364
I can care less about eatern california.....i mean Colorado. Thankfully I no longer reside there. So let the people in that state manage their lands as they see fit. As far as the state I reside in goes. I can care less if they ever sell one more out of state tag. Let the people in their own state hunt there. Less folks I have to deal with here.
 
OP
TXCO

TXCO

WKR
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
854
I am not asking to take take take, Im trying to present a case on the long term impacts of further NR tag reductions across the West. Im saying it becomes one major issue, not two separate issues when a public land advocacy group starts requesting a reduction in tag numbers for non residents. In CO, it seems simply that resident income taxes do not fund DOW and if the federal government is paying for the national forrest, blm and wilderness, and deer/elk tags are funded 6x more by non residents than residents then it appears that the majority of funds are actually paid for by nonresidents whether they want to (tags) or not (federal income taxes). As the country tries to balance a budget and all the other needs, federal funding is a serious risk.

My problem is again CO BHA mixing these two issues together and Im asking people to consider the possible long term impacts of trying to further reduce access/allocation of hunting to nonresidents when the majority of the country doesnt live and vote in western states. A lot of what I wrote over the last 24 hours was to help present facts in this case (CO), and remove emotion. Its obviously a sensitive topic but when we as public land hunters are shrinking in comparison to the rest of the population, how do we grow and keep the opportunities in tact for generations to come? I wrote earlier how great the access is in CO for NRs and how it gets so many people involved in our great sport, but if access is brought in line with other states thats going away (cut to 10% or worse and no OTC) We've seen the deer tags in CO go all draw and people pushing for elk as well. I want to fight for a right to hunt just as much as a CO or UT or ID or PA resident.

Again, if more tags are given to a smaller pool of people more frequently, it doesnt grow the sport and protect it at the voting both over the years. Is a new hunter in MT or CO going to get started in hunting because he or she can draw an elk tag in a premium unit 1 or 2 years sooner? If every state followed New Mexico and went 3% NR limit or Oregon, what would the national landscape for hunting look like? Nothing guarantees CO keeps OTC going in the future and what happens then or a generation later?

Things I've gathered from this thread.
1 it doesn't matter that half the units in Colorado is OTC, but unlimited tags is not enough we need more!!!!'nn
2 OTC hunts should only be otc for nonres, residents don't deserve that right.
3 A kid in Texas who's going to go hunting deserves a better chance at getting a tag in Colorado than a kid growing up in Colorado

The way I see it, hunting in Colorado as a non resident is a privilege not a right, giving more opportunity to someone as a nonres is taking away opportunity from a resident, residents should ALWAYS be given more, it is their state. It's like if I invited you over to my house for dinner and we watched tv, you really like my tv it's big, now you deserve to take my tv?????

In all honesty ZERO opportunity is taken away from non residents, you have UNLIMITED opportunities to hunt Colorado EVERY SINGLE YEAR!! And one day that will change, someday hopefully things will be more in line with other states and more units will be limited or the OTC tag will be like Wyoming's general tag.


TXCO you want to take take take, but give very little, before trying to change how Colorado manages their game animals, why don't you work on ways to provide more public hunting access in the state of Texas. If I could come to Texas, buy a tag and hunt public land for deer, pigs, turkey, etc. have have as much land as I do in Colorado, AND I didn't have to draw that tag in Texas, then I will get more on board with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,516
Location
SW Colorado
Did New Mexico's landscape change when they lowered the nonresident quota? No, Did Utahs landscape change when SFW took a huge chunk of tags out of the non-resident pool to auction off? No, Did Colorado see a huge boycott like what was threatened when they raised non-resident fees a few years back? No.
 

William Hanson (live2hunt)

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,861
Location
Missouri
With me personally, my political opinion and votes are based to some degree on public land use and as a non resident if my hunting opportunities decrease, so does my vested interest in public lands and therefore aligning my votes with politicians who share my values in other areas become higher priority. It is counter productive for keeping public lands public to decrease hunting opportunity for non residents. I know public lands and game management are 2 separate issues but they are strongly connected politically and fish a game departments that don't take this into consideration will harm the big picture imo.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
3,431
Location
Humboldt county
With me personally, my political opinion and votes are based to some degree on public land use and as a non resident if my hunting opportunities decrease, so does my vested interest in public lands and therefore aligning my votes with politicians who share my values in other areas become higher priority. It is counter productive for keeping public lands public to decrease hunting opportunity for non residents. I know public lands and game management are 2 separate issues but they are strongly connected politically and fish a game departments that don't take this into consideration will harm the big picture imo.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I understand hunting is your main draw but you can do an enormous amount of other things on public lands that don't involve hunting.

Just because your opportunity for tags may be decreased slightly doesn't mean your vested interest should. That's a selfish mindset, as public lands are more important then just how they benefit you personally.

For years I've given money to WSF and Rocky Mountain Goat Alliance, I've done surveys for animals in Washington, Utah, Oregon, and California for animals that I will NEVER hunt. I don't get anything out of that, except the hope that those animals will continue to thrive long after I'm gone.

Sometimes you need to believe in things bigger then yourself, public lands and animal conservation should be 2 of those things if any one calls themselves a hunter.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
3,234
Location
Some wilderness area, somewhere
Did New Mexico's landscape change when they lowered the nonresident quota? No, Did Utahs landscape change when SFW took a huge chunk of tags out of the non-resident pool to auction off? No, Did Colorado see a huge boycott like what was threatened when they raised non-resident fees a few years back? No.
According to Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Colorado hunting and combo license sales have decreased. Revenue has increased, but adjusting for inflation has actually decreased.
The cure, according to them, is increasing resident license costs.

Esse quam videri
 

William Hanson (live2hunt)

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,861
Location
Missouri
I understand hunting is your main draw but you can do an enormous amount of other things on public lands that don't involve hunting.

Just because your opportunity for tags may be decreased slightly doesn't mean your vested interest should. That's a selfish mindset, as public lands are more important then just how they benefit you personally.

For years I've given money to WSF and Rocky Mountain Goat Alliance, I've done surveys for animals in Washington, Utah, Oregon, and California for animals that I will NEVER hunt. I don't get anything out of that, except the hope that those animals will continue to thrive long after I'm gone.

Sometimes you need to believe in things bigger then yourself, public lands and animal conservation should be 2 of those things if any one calls themselves a hunter.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I get that and I'm not saying I would quit caring about public lands, as that will never be the case. What I'm saying is hunting is my biggest draw to public lands no question and if that becomes less accessible then my voting priority changes. Currently I will align my votes with politicians who support public lands even if I disagree with some of their other stances, if my hunting access diminishes then my other values will start taking higher priority. It's not a lack of seeing the big picture, it's simply using my votes to affect things that matter to me the most.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

Bulldawg

WKR
Joined
Aug 8, 2014
Messages
928
Location
Minnesota
I still don't understand what you are b****ing about when more than half the state is OTC!!

In your theory, taking away 1000 tags away from residents and giving those to nonresidents will increase the amount of voters in other states to help fight for public lands!!!!!!!!

Ok then you take 1000 voters out of the Colorado pool that can advocate for public lands.
You take one 1000 votes out of one state and spread that across 49 other states, do 20 votes per state, that doesn't really do much in the whole scheme of things.

And for all you that say you won't support a group that is going to take away your ability to get a tag, YOU CAN GET A F***ING BULL TAG EVERY SINGLE YEAR!!! And I will venture to say that the biggest bull taken in the state of Colorado comes off an OTC unit very regularly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,516
Location
SW Colorado
Backpack hunter I would gladly pay double for my resident licenses if it meant the R/NR split was more in line with other western states
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
3,234
Location
Some wilderness area, somewhere
I don't really care what residents pay. Just pointing out that revenues have been lost in CO.
On another note, CO has a lot more elk than any other state. Doesn't seem to make sense that they would allocate tags the same way a state does that has fewer elk.

Esse quam videri
 
OP
TXCO

TXCO

WKR
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Messages
854
Just being sarcastic and in line with other posts about NRs moving to CO, why dont you move to those states where you can then have minimal NR tags and leave CO to all Californians, Texans and other NR hunters and hippies?

Backpack hunter I would gladly pay double for my resident licenses if it meant the R/NR split was more in line with other western states
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
2,638
Did New Mexico's landscape change when they lowered the nonresident quota? No, Did Utahs landscape change when SFW took a huge chunk of tags out of the non-resident pool to auction off? No, Did Colorado see a huge boycott like what was threatened when they raised non-resident fees a few years back? No.

Yes it did, some LO vouchers now push $10k in some units, and there are more LO vouchers then ever before. On top of that look at CO NR license sales after that decision.

Everyone mocks Texas because of the Pay to play association, but that's exactly what you will do to your own state. More and more Tags will go in the Landowner pool. CO the next Utah....... elite tags go to elite payers.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
2,638
Things I've gathered from this thread.
1 it doesn't matter that half the units in Colorado is OTC, but unlimited tags is not enough we need more!!!!'nn
2 OTC hunts should only be otc for nonres, residents don't deserve that right.
3 A kid in Texas who's going to go hunting deserves a better chance at getting a tag in Colorado than a kid growing up in Colorado

The way I see it, hunting in Colorado as a non resident is a privilege not a right, giving more opportunity to someone as a nonres is taking away opportunity from a resident, residents should ALWAYS be given more, it is their state. It's like if I invited you over to my house for dinner and we watched tv, you really like my tv it's big, now you deserve to take my tv?????

In all honesty ZERO opportunity is taken away from non residents, you have UNLIMITED opportunities to hunt Colorado EVERY SINGLE YEAR!! And one day that will change, someday hopefully things will be more in line with other states and more units will be limited or the OTC tag will be like Wyoming's general tag.


TXCO you want to take take take, but give very little, before trying to change how Colorado manages their game animals, why don't you work on ways to provide more public hunting access in the state of Texas. If I could come to Texas, buy a tag and hunt public land for deer, pigs, turkey, etc. have have as much land as I do in Colorado, AND I didn't have to draw that tag in Texas, then I will get more on board with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sucks that both kids aren't Americans.
 
Top